Robustness of classifiers to changing environments

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 6085 LNAI, Issue , 2010, Pages 232-243

  Abbasian, Houman ^a   Drummond, Chris ^b   Japkowicz, Nathalie ^a   Matwin, Stan ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL CANADA   (Canada)

^c INSTITUTE OF COMPUTER SCIENCE   (Poland)

Author keywords

Changing environments; Classifier evaluation; Classifier robustness

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; CHANGING ENVIRONMENT; CLASSIFIER EVALUATION; ENSEMBLE ALGORITHMS; K-NEAREST NEIGHBORS; LOGISTIC REGRESSIONS; NAIVE BAYES;

DECISION TREES; FUZZY CONTROL; NEURAL NETWORKS;

CLASSIFIERS;

EID: 77953799452     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-13059-5_23     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. Alaiz-Rodríguez, R., Guerrero-Curieses, A., Cid-Sueiro, J.: Minimax regret classifier for imprecise class distributions. Journal of Machine Learning Research 8, 103-130 (2007)
2. Alaiz-Rodríguez, R., Japkowicz, N.: Assessing the impact of changing environments on classifier performance. In: Proceedings of the 21st Canadian Conference in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 13-24 (2008)
3. Blake, C., Merz, C.: UCI repository of machine learning databases. Univ. of California, Irvine (1998), http://www.ics.uci.edu/∼mlearn/MLRepository. html
4. Drummond, C.: Discriminative vs. generative classifiers for cost sensitive learning. In: Lamontagne, L., Marchand, M. (eds.) Canadian AI 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol.4013, pp. 481-492. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
5. Drummond, C., Holte, R.C.: Cost curves: An improved method for visualizing classifier performance. Machine Learning 65(1), 95-130 (2006)
6. Holte, R.C.: Very simple classification rules perform well on most commonly used datasets. Machine Learning 11(1), 63-91 (1993)
7. Huang, J., Smola, A.J., retton, A.G., Borgwardt, K.M., Schölkopf, B.: Correcting sample selection bias by unlabeled data. In: Schölkopf, B., Platt, J., Hoffman, T. (eds.) Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 19, pp. 601-608. MIT Press, Cambridge (2007)
8. Provost, F., Fawcett, T.: Robust classification for imprecise environments. Machine Learning 42, 203-231 (2001)
9. Provost, F., Fawcett, T., Kohavi, R.: The case against accuracy estimation for comparing induction algorithms. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 43-48. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1998)
10. Ross, J.: Quinlan. C4.5 Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1993)
11. Quionero-Candela, J., Sugiyama, M., Schwaighofer, A., Lawrence, N.D.: Dataset Shift in Machine Learning. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2009)
12. Turney, P.D.: Exploiting context when learning to classify. In: Brazdil, P.B. (ed.) ECML 1993. LNCS, vol.667, pp. 402-407. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)
13. Turney, P.D.: The management of context-sensitive features: A review of strategies. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Machine Learning: Workshop on Learning in Context-Sensitive Domains, pp. 60-66 (1996)
14. Widmer, G., Kubat, M.: Learning in the presence of concept drift and hidden contexts. Machine Learning 23, 69-101 (1996)
15. Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-hoc-analysis
16. Witten, I.H., Frank, E.: Data Mining: Practical machine learning tools and techniques. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2005)