Advertisement

Multi-interval discretization methods for decision tree learning

  • Petra Perner
  • Sascha Trautzsch
Poster Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1451)

Abstract

Properly addressing the discretization process of continuos valued features is an important problem during decision tree learning. This paper describes four multi-interval discretization methods for induction of decision trees used in dynamic fashion. We compare two known discretization methods to two new methods proposed in this paper based on a histogram based method and a neural net based method (LVQ). We compare them according to accuracy of the resulting decision tree and to compactness of the tree. For our comparison we used three data bases, IRIS domain, satellite domain and OHS domain (ovariel hyper stimulation).

Keywords

Discretization Method Learn Vector Quantization Decision Tree Learning Entropy Criterion Minimal Description Length Principle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Breiman, L.; Friedman, J.H.; Olsen, R.A. and Stone, C.J.: „Classification and Regression Trees”, Monterey, CA: Wadsworth & Brooks, 1984.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dougherty, J.; Kohavi, R. and Sahamin, M.: „Supervised and Unsupervised Discretization of Continuous Features”, Machine Learning, 14th IJCAI, pp. 194–202 1995.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fayyad, U.M. and Irani, K.B.: „Multi-Interval Discretization of Continuous-Valued Attributes for Classification Learning”, Machine Learning, 13th IJCAI, vol. 2., Chambery, France, Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 1022–1027, 1993.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Haake, K.W.; Perner, P.; Trautzsch, S.; List, P. and Alexander, H.: „Inductive machine learning program in 414 stimulated in-vitro-fertilization (IVF) cycles for the estimation and validation of varying parameters”, 11th Annual Meeting of Human Reproduction, vol. 10, Abstract Book 2, Hamburg, 1995.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Huber, T.P. and Casler, K.E.: „Initial Analysis of Landset TM data for Elk Habitat Mapping”, Intern. Journal of Remote Sensing, vol. 44, pp. 907–912, 1990.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kerber, R.: „ChiMerge: Discretization of Numeric Attributes”, Learning: Inductive, AAAI 92, pp. 123–128, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kohonen, T.: „Self-Organizing Maps”, Springer Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Quinlan, J.R.: „Induction of Decision Trees”, Machine Learning 1, pp. 81–106, 1986.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Quinlan, J.R.: „C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning”, Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, California, 1993.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Perner, P.; Belikova, T. and Yashunskaja, I.: „Knowledge Acquisition by Symbolic Decision Tree Induction for Interpretation of Digital Images in Radiology”, In Proc. Advances in Structural and Syntactical Pattern Recognition, Springer Verlag, pp. 208–219, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li, Y.K. and Fu, K.S.: „Automatic Classification of Cervical Cell using a Binary Tree Classifier”, Pattern Recognition, vol. 16, pp. 69–80, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wu C.; Landgrebe D. and Swain P.: „The decision tree approach to classification”, School Elec. Eng., Purdue Univ., W. Lafayette, IN, Rep. RE-EE 75-17„ 1975.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harkonen, A.; Mitika, R. and Moring, I.: „Software tool for developring algorithms for surface inspection systems”, in Proc. of SPIE 94, vo. 2248, pp. 41–49, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Petra Perner
    • 1
  • Sascha Trautzsch
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Computer Vision and Applied Computer Sciences e.V.LeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations