Skip to main content

Statistical decision-making is widely used in experimental earth sciences. The topic plays an even more important role in Environmental Sciences due to the time varying nature of a system under observation and the possible necessity to take corrective actions. A set of possible corrective actions is usually available in a decision-making situation. Such a set is also known as the set of decisions. A number of observations of physical attributes (or variables) would also be potentially available. It is desirable for the corrective action selected in a situation to minimize the damage or cost, or maximize the benefit. Considering that a cost is a negative benefit, scientists and practitioners develop a composite single criterion that should be minimized, for a given decision-making problem. A best decision, one that minimizes the composite cost criterion, is also known as an optimal decision.

The process of obtaining or collecting the values that the physical variables take in an event is also known by other names such as extracting features (or feature variables) and making measurements of the variables. The variables are also called by other names such as features, feature variables, and measurements. Among the many possible physical variables that might influence the decision, collecting some of them may pose challenges. There may be a cost, risk, or some other penalty associated with the process of collecting some of these variables. In some other cases, the time delay in obtaining the measurements may also add to the cost of decision-making. This may take the form of certain losses because a corrective action could not be implemented earlier due to the time delay in the measurement process. These costs should be included in the overall cost criterion. Therefore, the process of decision-making may also involve deciding whether or not to collect some of the measurements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Anderberg, M. R. (1973). Cluster analysis for applications. Academic: New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Bassat, M. (1982). Use of distance measures, information measures, and error bounds on feature evaluation. In P. R. Krishnaiah, & L. N. Kanal (Eds.), Classification, pattern recognition, and reduction of Dimensionality. Handbook of statistics(Vol. 2, pp. 773–791). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Olshen, R., & Stone, C. (1984). Classification and regression trees. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth International Group

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannon, A. J., & Whitfield, P. H. (2002). ‘Synoptic map-pattern classification using recursive partitioning and principal component analysis’, Monthly Weather Review, 130, 1187–1206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chai, B.-B., Zhuang, X., Zhao, Y., & Sklansky, J. (1996). Binary linear decision tree with genetic algorithm. Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Pattern Recognition(pp. 530–534). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dattatreya, G. R., & Kanal, L. N. (1985). Decision trees in pattern recognition. In L. N. Kanal, & A. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Progress in pattern recognition(pp. 189–237). Amsterdam: North-Holland

    Google Scholar 

  • Duda, R. O., Hart, P. E., & Stork, D. G. (2001). Pattern classification. New York: Wiley-Interscience

    Google Scholar 

  • Goel, P. K., Prasher, S. O., Patel, R. M., Landry, J. A., Bonnell, R. B., & Viau, A. A. (2003). Classification of hyperspectral data by decision trees and artificial neural networks to identify weed stress and nitrogen status of corn. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 39, 67–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, J., & Kamber M. (2006). Data mining. San Francisco: Morgan Kauffman

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, M. I., & Jacobs, R. A. (1994). Hierarchical mixtures of experts and the EM algorithm. Neural Computation, 6, 181–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, L., & Rousseeuw, P. J. (1990). Finding groups in data: An introduction to cluster analysis. New York: Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, B., & Koehler, G. J. (1994). An investigation on the conditions for pruning an induced binary tree. European Journal of Operations Research. 77, 82–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kononenko, I., & Hong, S. J. (1997). Attribute selection for modeling. Future Generation Computer Systems, 13, 181–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knowledge Discovery and Nuggets web-page, http://www.kdnuggets.com/software.html

  • Li, X., & Claramunt, A. (2006). A spatial entropy-based decision tree classification of geographical information. Transactions in Geographical Information Systems, 10, 451–467

    Google Scholar 

  • Manago, M., & Kodratoff, Y. (1991). Induction of decision trees from complex structured data. In G. Piatetsky-Shapiro, & W. J. Frawley (Eds.), Knowledge discovery in databases(pp. 289–306). Cambridge, MA: AAAI/MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Moret, B. M. E. (1982). Decision trees and diagrams. ACM Computing Surveys, 14, 593–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murthy, S. K. (1998). Automatic construction of decision trees from data: A multi-disciplinary survey. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 2, 345–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, H., & Meisel, W. (1977). An algorithm for constructing optimal binary decision trees. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 26, 905–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, R. W., & Preece, D. A. (1980). Identification keys and diagnostic tables. Journal of Royal Statistical Society: Series A, 143, 253–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinlan, J. R. (1990). Decision trees and decision-making. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 20, 339–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinlan, J. R. (1993). Programs for machine learning. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann

    Google Scholar 

  • Rastogi, R., & Shim, K. (1998). Public: A decision tree classifier that integrates building and pruning. In A. Gupta, O. Shmueli, & J. Widom (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases (pp. 404–415), San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2002). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

    Google Scholar 

  • Safavian, S. R., & Landgrebe, D. (1991). A survey of decision tree classifier methodology. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 21, 660–674

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, P. F, Dell, L. D., & Anderson, G. F. (1993). Root cause analysis. American Society for Quality: Milwaukee,WI

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. R. Dattatreya .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dattatreya, G.R. (2009). Decision Trees. In: Haupt, S.E., Pasini, A., Marzban, C. (eds) Artificial Intelligence Methods in the Environmental Sciences. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9119-3_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics