Learning and explaining the impact of enterprises' organizational quality on their economic results

Intelligent Data Analysis for Real-Life Applications: Theory and Practice

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 228-248

  Pregeljc, Marko ^a   Štrumbelj, Erik ^a   Mihelčič, Miran ^a   Kononenko, Igor ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84898274391     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-1806-0.ch012     Document Type: Chapter

References (16)

1. Becker, B., Kohavi, R., & Sommerfield, D. (1997). Visualizing the simple Bayesian classier. In KDD Workshop on Issues in the Integration of Data Mining and Data Visualization. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
2. Dutton, J. E., & Ragins, B. R. (2007). Positive relationships at work: An introduction and invitation. In Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a theoretical and research foundation (pp. 3-25). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
3. Hall, M., Frank, E., Holmes, G., Pfahringer, B., Reutemann, P., & Witten, I. H. (2009). The WEKA data mining software: An update. SIGKDD Explorations, 11(1), 1-3. doi:10.1145/1656274.1656278
4. Jakulin, A., Možina, M., Demšar, J., Bratko, I., & Zupan, B. (2005). Nomograms for visualizing support vector machines. In KDD '05: ACM SIGKDD (pp. 108-117). New York, NY: ACM.
5. Lemaire, V., Feraud, V., & Voisine, N. (2008). Contact personalization using a score understanding method. In International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) (pp. 649-654). Hong Kong: IEEE Xplore.
6. Mihelčič, M. (1992a). Focusing on relationships as a means of accelerating organizational improvement. In Geschka, H., & Huebner, H. (Eds.), Innovation strategies - Theoretical approaches - Experiences - Improvements - An international perspective (pp. 141-152). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
7. Mihelčič, M. (1992b). Interdependency between perceived quality of companies' organization (or-ganizational excellence) and performance: Some assumptions of correlational study. Slovenska Ekonomska Revija, 43(1), 67-81.
8. Mihelčič, M. (2007). Could learning about the structure of relationships lead either to a break-through or synthesis in organization theory? In Proceedings: Beyond Waltz - Dances of Individuals and Organization, 23rd EGOS Colloquium, Vienna, 4-7 July 2007. London, UK: Sage Publications.
9. Moretti, S., & Patrone, F. (2008). Transversality of the Shapley value. Top (Madrid), 16, 1-41. doi:10.1007/s11750-008-0044-5
10. Možina, M., Demšar, J., Kattan, M., & Zupan, B. (2004). Nomograms for visualization of naive Bayesian classifier. In PKDD 2004 (pp. 337-348). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30116-5_32
11. Robnik-Šikonja, M., & Kononenko, I. (2003). Theoretical and empirical analysis of ReliefF and RReliefF. Machine Learning Journal, 53, 23-69. doi:10.1023/A:1025667309714
12. Shapley, L. S. (1953). A value for n-person games. In Kuhn, H. W., & Tucker, A. W. (Eds.), contributions to the theory of games (Vol. II). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
13. Štrumbelj, E., & Kononenko, I. (2010). An efficient explanation of individual classifications using game theory. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 11, 1-18.
14. Štrumbelj, E., & Kononenko, I. (in press). A general method for visualizing and explaining black-box regression models. International Conference on Adaptive and Natural Computing Algorithms, ICANNGA 2011.
15. Szafron, D., Poulin, B., Eisner, R., Lu, P., Greiner, R., & Wishart, D....Anvik, J. (2006). Visual explanation of evidence in additive classifiers. In Proceedings of Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence - Volume 2. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
16. Zien, A., Krämer, N., Sonnenburg, S., & Rätsch, G. (2009). The feature importance ranking measure. In ECML PKDD 2009: Part II (pp. 694-709). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.