Generalizing Knowledge in Decentralized Rule-Based Models

  • Pedro StrechtEmail author
  • João Mendes-Moreira
  • Carlos Soares
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 967)


Knowledge generalization of ruled-based models, such as decision trees or decision rules, have emerged from different backgrounds. This particular kind of models, given their interpretability, offer several possibilities to be combined. Despite each distinct context, common patterns have emerged revealing the systemic nature of the problem. In this paper, we look at the problem of generalizing the knowledge contained in a set of models as a process formalizing the operations that can be addressed in alternative ways. We also include a set-up to evaluate generalized models based on their ability to replace the base ones from a predictive performance perspective, without loss of interpretability.


Knowledge generalization Rule-based models 


  1. 1.
    Andrzejak, A., Langner, F., Zabala, S.: Interpretable models from distributed data via merging of decision trees. In: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Data Mining. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bursteinas, B., Long, J.: Merging distributed classifiers. In: Proceedings of the 5th World Multiconference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gorbunov, K., Lyubetsky, V.: The tree nearest on average to a given set of trees. Probl. Inf. Transm. 47(3), 274–288 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hall, L., Chawla, N., Bowyer, K.: Combining decision trees learned in parallel. In: Working Notes of the KDD-97 Workshop on Distributed Data Mining, pp. 10–15 (1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Han, J., Kamber, M., Pei, J.: Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2011)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kargupta, H., Park, B.: A fourier spectrum-based approach to represent decision trees for mining data streams in mobile environments. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 16, 216–229 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maimon, O., Rokach, L.: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery Handbook, 2nd edn. Springer, Boston (2010). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Opitz, D., Maclin, R.: Popular ensemble methods: an empirical study. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 11, 169–198 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Quinlan, J.: Induction of decision trees. Mach. Learn. 1(1), 81–106 (1986)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shannon, W.D., Banks, D.: Combining classification trees using MLE. Stat. Med. 18(6), 727–740 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stone, M.: Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. J. Roy. Stat. Soc.: Ser. B 36(2), 111–147 (1974)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Strecht, P., Mendes-Moreira, J., Soares, C.: Merging decision trees: a case study in predicting student performance. In: Luo, X., Yu, J.X., Li, Z. (eds.) ADMA 2014. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8933, pp. 535–548. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weiss, S., Indurkhya, N.: Optimized rule induction. IEEE Expert 8(6), 61 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Weiss, S.M., Indurkhya, N.: Rule-based machine learning methods for functional prediction. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 3, 383–403 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Williams, G.: Inducing and combining multiple decision trees. Ph.D. thesis, Australian National University (1990)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.INESC TEC/Faculdade de EngenhariaUniversidade do PortoPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations