Classification algorithm sensitivity to training data with non representative attribute noise

Decision Support Systems

Volumn 46, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 743-751

  Mannino, Michael ^a   Yang, Yanjuan ^a   Ryu, Young ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS   (United States)

Author keywords

Area under the Receiver Operating Curve; Attribute noise; Classification algorithm

Indexed keywords

AREA UNDER THE RECEIVER OPERATING CURVE; ATTRIBUTE NOISE; CLASSIFICATION ALGORITHM; NOISE LEVELS;

ALGORITHMS;

EID: 58749104155     PISSN: 01679236     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.dss.2008.11.021     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Aha D., and Kibler D. Instance-based learning algorithms. Machine Learning 6 (1991) 37-66
2. Breiman L., Friedman J., Olshen R., and Stone C. Classification and Regression Trees (1984), Wadsworth Publishing, Belmont, CA
3. Bshouty N., Eiron N., and Kushilevitz E. PAC learning with nasty noise. Theoretical Computer Science 288 2 (October 2002) 255-275
4. Bshouty N., Jackson J., and Tamon T. Uniform-distribution attribute noise learnability. Information and Computation 187 2 (2003) 277-290
5. Cessie S., and Houwelingen J. Ridge estimators in logistic regression. Applied Statistics 41 1 (1992) 191-201
6. Cestnik B., and Bratko I. On estimating probabilities in tree pruning. Proceedings of the European Working Session on Machine Learning (March 1991), Springer-Verlag, Porto, Portugal 138-150
7. Decatur S. Learning in hybrid noise environments using statistical queries. In: Fisher D., and Lens H. (Eds). Learning From Data: AI and Statistics (1996), Springer-Verlag 259-270
8. Demarest M. The Politics of Data Warehousing (07/23/2004). http://dssresources.com/papers/features/demarest/demarest07232004.html DSSResources.COM, http://dssresources.com/papers/features/demarest/demarest07232004.html
9. Dietterich T. An experimental comparison of three methods for constructing ensembles of decision trees: bagging, boosting, and randomization. Machine Learning 40 2 (2000) 139-158
10. Fawcett T., and Flach P. A response to Webb and Ting's on the application of ROC analysis to predict classification performance under varying class distributions. Machine Learning 58 (2005) 33-38
11. Freund Y., and Schapire R. Experiments with a new boosting algorithm. Proc. International Conference on Machine Learning (1996), Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco 148-156
12. Goldman S., and Stone R. Can PAC algorithms tolerate random attribute noise?. Algorithimica 14 (1995) 70-84
13. Hettich S., Blake C., and Merz C. UCI Repository of Machine Learning Databases (1998), Department of Information and Computer Science, University of California, Irvine. http://www.ics.uci.edu/~mlearn/MLRepository.html http://www.ics.uci.edu/~mlearn/MLRepository.html
14. Kim W., and Choi B. Towards quantifying data quality costs. Journal of Object Technology 2 4 (July-August 2003) 69-76
15. Keerthi S., Shevade S., Bhattacharyya C., and Murthy K. Improvements to Platt's SMO algorithm for SVM classifier design. Neural Computation 13 3 (2001) 637-649
16. Laird P. Learning from Good and Bad Data (1988), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA
17. Li S., and Lin B. Accessing information sharing and information quality in supply chain management. Decision Support Systems 42 3 (December 2006) 1641-1656
18. Mannino M., Mookerjee V., and Gilson R. Improving the performance stability of inductive expert systems under input noise. Information Systems Research 6 4 (December 1995) 328-356
19. Mingers J. An empirical comparison of pruning methods for decision tree induction. Machine Learning 4 2 (1989) 227-243
20. Nolan J. Computer systems that learn: an empirical study of the effect of noise on the performance of three classification methods. Expert Systems Applications 23 1 (2002) 39-47
21. ® 10.2 Database Performance Tuning Guide (2006). http://www.oracle.com www.oracle.com
22. Orr K. Data quality and systems theory. CACM 41 2 (February 1998) 66-71
23. Perlich C., Provost F., and Simonoff J. Tree induction vs. logistic regression: a learning-curve analysis. Journal of Machine Learning Research 4 (2003) 211-255
24. Pierce D., and Ackerman L. Data Aggregators: A Study of Data Quality and Responsiveness (May 2005). http://www.privacyactivism.org/docs/DataAggregatorsStudy.html available from http://www.privacyactivism.org/docs/DataAggregatorsStudy.html
25. Provost F., and Fawcett T. Robust classification for imprecise environments. Machine Learning Journal 42 3 (March 2001) 203-231
26. Quinlan J. Induction of decision trees. Machine Learning 1 (1986) 81-106
27. Quinlan J. The effect of noise on concept learning. In: Michalski R.S., Carbonell J.G., and Mitchell T.M. (Eds). Machine Learning, an Artificial Intelligence Approach, Volume II (1986), Morgan Kaufmann 149-166
28. Quinlan J. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning (1993), Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CA
29. Ratch R., Onoda T., and Muller K. Soft margins for AdaBoost. Machine Learning 42 (2001) 287-320
30. Redman T. Data quality for telecommunications. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 12 2 (Feb. 1994) 306-312.
31. Redman T. Data Quality for the Information Age (1996), Artech House
32. Redman T. The impact of poor data quality on the typical enterprise. CACM 41 2 (February 1998) 79-82
33. Sidak Z. Rectangular confidence regions for the means of multivariate normal distributions. JASA 62 (1967) 626-633
34. Su K., Huang H., Wu X., and Zhang S. A logical framework for identifying quality knowledge from different data sources. Decision Support Systems 42 3 (December 2006) 1673-1683
35. Webb G., and Ting K. On the application of ROC analysis to predict classification performance under varying class distributions. Machine Learning 58 (2005) 25-32
36. Witten I., and Frank E. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques. 2nd Edition (2005), Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco
37. Zhu X., and Wu X. Class noise vs. attribute noise: a quantitative study of their impacts. Artificial Intelligence Review 22 3 (2004) 177-210