Chp8 Classification Basic Concepts
Chp8 Classification Basic Concepts
Chp8 Classification Basic Concepts
Concepts and
Techniques
(3rd ed.)
— Chapter 8 —
5
Classification—A Two-Step
Process
Model construction: describing a set of predetermined classes
Each tuple/sample is assumed to belong to a predefined class, as
mathematical formulae
Model usage: for classifying future or unknown objects
Estimate accuracy of the model
The known label of test sample is compared with the classified
result from the model
Accuracy rate is the percentage of test set samples that are
correctly classified by the model
Test set is independent of training set (otherwise overfitting)
If the accuracy is acceptable, use the model to classify new data
Note: If the test set is used to select models, it is called validation (test) set
6
Process (1): Model
Construction
Classification
Algorithms
Training
Data
Classifier
Testing
Data Unseen Data
(Jeff, Professor, 4)
NAME RANK YEARS TENURED
Tom Assistant Prof 2 no Tenured?
Merlisa Associate Prof 7 no
George Professor 5 yes
Joseph Assistant Prof 7 yes
8
Chapter 8. Classification: Basic
Concepts
Classification: Basic Concepts
Decision Tree Induction
Bayes Classification Methods
Rule-Based Classification
Model Evaluation and Selection
Techniques to Improve Classification Accuracy:
Ensemble Methods
Summary
9
Decision Tree Induction: An
Example
age income student credit_rating buys_computer
<=30 high no fair no
Training data set: Buys_computer <=30 high no excellent no
The data set follows an example of 31…40 high no fair yes
>40 medium no fair yes
Quinlan’s ID3 (Playing Tennis) >40 low yes fair yes
Resulting tree: >40 low yes excellent no
31…40 low yes excellent yes
age? <=30 medium no fair no
<=30 low yes fair yes
>40 medium yes fair yes
<=30 medium yes excellent yes
<=30 overcast
31..40 >40 31…40 medium no excellent yes
31…40 high yes fair yes
>40 medium no excellent no
no yes no yes
10
Algorithm for Decision Tree
Induction
Basic algorithm (a greedy algorithm)
Tree is constructed in a top-down recursive divide-and-
conquer manner
At start, all the training examples are at the root
discretized in advance)
Examples are partitioned recursively based on selected
attributes
Test attributes are selected on the basis of a heuristic or
m=2
12
Attribute Selection Measure:
Information Gain (ID3/C4.5)
Select the attribute with the highest information gain
Let pi be the probability that an arbitrary tuple in D belongs to
class Ci, estimated by |Ci, D|/|D|
Expected information (entropy) needed to classify
m a tuple in D:
Info( D) pi log 2 ( pi )
i 1
Information needed (after using A to split D into v partitions) to
v | D |
classify D:
Info A ( D )
j
Info( D j )
j 1 | D |
The Gini index considers a binary split for each attribute. Let’s first
consider the case where A is a discrete-valued attribute having v
distinct values, {a1, a2, … , av}, occurring in D.
21
Other Attribute Selection
Measures
CHAID: a popular decision tree algorithm, measure based on χ2 test for
independence
C-SEP: performs better than info. gain and gini index in certain cases
G-statistic: has a close approximation to χ2 distribution
MDL (Minimal Description Length) principle (i.e., the simplest solution is
preferred):
The best tree as the one that requires the fewest # of bits to both (1)
encode the tree, and (2) encode the exceptions to the tree
Multivariate splits (partition based on multiple variable combinations)
CART: finds multivariate splits based on a linear comb. of attrs.
Which attribute selection measure is the best?
Most give good results, none is significantly superior than others
22
Overfitting and Tree Pruning
Overfitting: An induced tree may overfit the training data
Too many branches, some may reflect anomalies due to
noise or outliers
Poor accuracy for unseen samples
26
Rainforest: Training Set and Its
AVC Sets
28
Presentation of Classification
Results
36
Naïve Bayes Classifier
A simplified assumption: attributes are conditionally
independent (i.e., no dependence relation between attributes):
n
P( X | C i ) P( x | C i ) P( x | C i ) P( x | C i ) ...P( x | C i )
k 1 2 n
This greatly reduces the computation cost: Only counts the
k 1
class distribution
If Ak is categorical, P(xk|Ci) is the # of tuples in Ci having value xk
for Ak divided by |Ci, D| (# of tuples of Ci in D)
If Ak is continous-valued, P(xk|Ci) is usually computed based on
Gaussian distribution with a mean μ and standard deviation σ
( x )2
1
and P(xk|Ci) is g ( x, , ) e 2 2
2
P ( X | C i ) g ( xk , Ci , Ci )
37
Naïve Bayes Classifier: Training
Dataset
age income studentcredit_rating
buys_compu
<=30 high no fair no
Class: <=30 high no excellent no
C1:buys_computer = ‘yes’ 31…40 high no fair yes
C2:buys_computer = ‘no’ >40 medium no fair yes
>40 low yes fair yes
>40 low yes excellent no
Data to be classified:
31…40 low yes excellent yes
X = (age <=30,
<=30 medium no fair no
Income = medium, <=30 low yes fair yes
Student = yes >40 medium yes fair yes
Credit_rating = Fair) <=30 medium yes excellent yes
31…40 medium no excellent yes
31…40 high yes fair yes
>40 medium no excellent no
38
Naïve Bayes Classifier: An
Example age income studentcredit_rating
buys_comp
<=30 high no fair no
<=30 high no excellent no
31…40 high no fair yes
P(Ci): P(buys_computer = “yes”) = 9/14 = 0.643 >40
>40
>40
medium
low
low
no fair
yes fair
yes excellent
yes
yes
no
“uncorrected” counterparts 40
Naïve Bayes Classifier: Comments
Advantages
Easy to implement
Disadvantages
Assumption: class conditional independence, therefore loss of
accuracy
Practically, dependencies exist among variables
E.g., hospitals: patients: Profile: age, family history, etc.
Symptoms: fever, cough etc., Disease: lung cancer,
diabetes, etc.
Dependencies among these cannot be modeled by Naïve
Bayes Classifier
How to deal with these dependencies? Bayesian Belief Networks
(Chapter 9)
41
Chapter 8. Classification: Basic
Concepts
Classification: Basic Concepts
Decision Tree Induction
Bayes Classification Methods
Rule-Based Classification
Model Evaluation and Selection
Techniques to Improve Classification Accuracy:
Ensemble Methods
Summary
42
Using IF-THEN Rules for
Classification
Represent the knowledge in the form of IF-THEN rules
R: IF age = youth AND student = yes THEN buys_computer = yes
Rule antecedent/precondition vs. rule consequent
Each time a rule is learned, the tuples covered by the rules are
removed
Repeat the process on the remaining tuples until termination
Examples covered
Examples covered by Rule 2
by Rule 1 Examples covered
by Rule 3
Positive
examples
46
Rule Generation
To generate a rule
while(true)
find the best predicate p
if foil-gain(p) > threshold then add p to current rule
else break
A3=1&&A1=2
A3=1&&A1=2
&&A8=5A3=1
Positive Negative
examples examples
47
How to Learn-One-Rule?
Start with the most general rule possible: condition = empty
Adding new attributes by adopting a greedy depth-first strategy
Picks the one that most improves the rule quality
Rule-Quality measures: consider both coverage and accuracy
Foil-gain (in FOIL & RIPPER): assesses info_gain by extending
condition pos ' pos
FOIL _ Gain pos '(log 2 log 2 )
pos 'neg ' pos neg
favors rules that have high accuracy and cover many positive tuples
Rule pruning based on an independent set of test tuples
pos neg
FOIL _ Prune( R)
pos neg
Pos/neg are # of positive/negative tuples covered by R.
If FOIL_Prune is higher for the pruned version of R, prune R
48
Chapter 8. Classification: Basic
Concepts
Classification: Basic Concepts
Decision Tree Induction
Bayes Classification Methods
Rule-Based Classification
Model Evaluation and Selection
Techniques to Improve Classification Accuracy:
Ensemble Methods
Summary
49
Model Evaluation and Selection
Evaluation metrics: How can we measure accuracy? Other
metrics to consider?
Use validation test set of class-labeled tuples instead of
training set when assessing accuracy
Methods for estimating a classifier’s accuracy:
Holdout method, random subsampling
Cross-validation
Bootstrap
Comparing classifiers:
Confidence intervals
Cost-benefit analysis and ROC Curves
50
Classifier Evaluation Metrics:
Confusion Matrix
Confusion Matrix:
Actual class\Predicted class C1 ¬ C1
C1 True Positives (TP) False Negatives (FN)
¬ C1 False Positives (FP) True Negatives (TN)
Fß: weighted measure of precision and recall
assigns ß times as much weight to recall as to precision
53
Classifier Evaluation Metrics:
Example
54
Holdout & Cross-Validation
Methods
Holdout method
Given data is randomly partitioned into two independent sets
Training set (e.g., 2/3) for model construction
Test set (e.g., 1/3) for accuracy estimation
Random sampling: a variation of holdout
Repeat holdout k times, accuracy = avg. of the accuracies
obtained
Cross-validation (k-fold, where k = 10 is most popular)
Randomly partition the data into k mutually exclusive subsets,
each approximately equal size
At i-th iteration, use Di as test set and others as training set
Leave-one-out: k folds where k = # of tuples, for small sized
data
*Stratified cross-validation*: folds are stratified so that class
dist. in each fold is approx. the same as that in the initial data
55
Evaluating Classifier Accuracy:
Bootstrap
Bootstrap
Works well with small data sets
Samples the given training tuples uniformly with replacement
i.e., each time a tuple is selected, it is equally likely to be selected
again and re-added to the training set
Several bootstrap methods, and a common one is .632 boostrap
A data set with d tuples is sampled d times, with replacement, resulting in
a training set of d samples. The data tuples that did not make it into the
training set end up forming the test set. About 63.2% of the original data
end up in the bootstrap, and the remaining 36.8% form the test set (since
(1 – 1/d)d ≈ e-1 = 0.368)
Repeat the sampling procedure k times, overall accuracy of the model:
56
Estimating Confidence Intervals:
Classifier Models M1 vs. M2
Suppose we have 2 classifiers, M1 and M2, which one is better?
Use 10-fold cross-validation to obtain and
These mean error rates are just estimates of error on the true
population of future data cases
What if the difference between the 2 error rates is just
attributed to chance?
Use a test of statistical significance
Obtain confidence limits for our error estimates
57
Estimating Confidence Intervals:
Null Hypothesis
Perform 10-fold cross-validation
Assume samples follow a t distribution with k–1 degrees of
freedom (here, k=10)
Use t-test (or Student’s t-test)
Null Hypothesis: M1 & M2 are the same
If we can reject null hypothesis, then
we conclude that the difference between M1 & M2 is
statistically significant
Chose model with lower error rate
58
Estimating Confidence Intervals: t-test
Symmetric
Significance level,
e.g., sig = 0.05 or
5% means M1 & M2
are significantly
different for 95% of
population
Confidence limit, z
= sig/2
60
Estimating Confidence Intervals:
Statistical Significance
Are M1 & M2 significantly different?
Compute t. Select significance level (e.g. sig = 5%)
Consult table for t-distribution: Find t value corresponding to
k-1 degrees of freedom (here, 9)
t-distribution is symmetric: typically upper % points of
distribution shown → look up value for confidence limit
z=sig/2 (here, 0.025)
If t > z or t < -z, then t value lies in rejection region:
Reject null hypothesis that mean error rates of M & M
1 2
are same
Conclude: statistically significant difference between M &
1
M2
Otherwise, conclude that any difference is chance
61
Model Selection: ROC
Curves
ROC (Receiver Operating
Characteristics) curves: for visual
comparison of classification models
Originated from signal detection theory
Shows the trade-off between the true
positive rate and the false positive rate
The area under the ROC curve is a
Vertical axis
represents the true
measure of the accuracy of the model positive rate
Rank the test tuples in decreasing Horizontal axis rep.
order: the one that is most likely to the false positive rate
belong to the positive class appears at The plot also shows a
the top of the list diagonal line
The closer to the diagonal line (i.e., the A model with perfect
closer the area is to 0.5), the less accuracy will have an
accurate is the model area of 1.0
62
Issues Affecting Model Selection
Accuracy
classifier accuracy: predicting class label
Speed
time to construct the model (training time)
time to use the model (classification/prediction time)
Robustness: handling noise and missing values
Scalability: efficiency in disk-resident databases
Interpretability
understanding and insight provided by the model
Other measures, e.g., goodness of rules, such as decision tree
size or compactness of classification rules
63
Chapter 8. Classification: Basic
Concepts
Classification: Basic Concepts
Decision Tree Induction
Bayes Classification Methods
Rule-Based Classification
Model Evaluation and Selection
Techniques to Improve Classification Accuracy:
Ensemble Methods
Summary
64
Ensemble Methods: Increasing the
Accuracy
Ensemble methods
Use a combination of models to increase accuracy
classifiers
Boosting: weighted vote with a collection of classifiers
65
Bagging: Boostrap Aggregation
Analogy: Diagnosis based on multiple doctors’ majority vote
Training
Given a set D of d tuples, at each iteration i, a training set D of d tuples
i
is sampled with replacement from D (i.e., bootstrap)
A classifier model M is learned for each training set D
i i
Classification: classify an unknown sample X
Each classifier M returns its class prediction
i
The bagged classifier M* counts the votes and assigns the class with the
most votes to X
Prediction: can be applied to the prediction of continuous values by taking
the average value of each prediction for a given test tuple
Accuracy
Often significantly better than a single classifier derived from D
1 error ( M i )
The weight of classifier Mi’s vote is log
error ( M i )
68
Random Forest (Breiman 2001)
Random Forest:
Each classifier in the ensemble is a decision tree classifier and is
returned
Two Methods to construct Random Forest:
Forest-RI (random input selection): Randomly select, at each node, F
attributes as candidates for the split at the node. The CART methodology
is used to grow the trees to maximum size
Forest-RC (random linear combinations): Creates new attributes (or
class
Threshold-moving: moves the decision threshold, t, so that
the rare class tuples are easier to classify, and hence, less
chance of costly false negative errors
Ensemble techniques: Ensemble multiple classifiers
introduced above
Still difficult for class imbalance problem on multiclass tasks
70
Chapter 8. Classification: Basic
Concepts
72
Summary (II)
Significance tests and ROC curves are useful for model selection.
There have been numerous comparisons of the different
classification methods; the matter remains a research topic
No single method has been found to be superior over all others
for all data sets
Issues such as accuracy, training time, robustness, scalability,
and interpretability must be considered and can involve trade-
offs, further complicating the quest for an overall superior
method
73
References (1)
C. Apte and S. Weiss. Data mining with decision trees and decision rules. Future
Generation Computer Systems, 13, 1997
C. M. Bishop, Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition. Oxford University Press,
1995
L. Breiman, J. Friedman, R. Olshen, and C. Stone. Classification and Regression Trees.
Wadsworth International Group, 1984
C. J. C. Burges. A Tutorial on Support Vector Machines for Pattern Recognition. Data
Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 2(2): 121-168, 1998
P. K. Chan and S. J. Stolfo. Learning arbiter and combiner trees from partitioned data
for scaling machine learning. KDD'95
H. Cheng, X. Yan, J. Han, and C.-W. Hsu,
Discriminative Frequent Pattern Analysis for Effective Classification, ICDE'07
H. Cheng, X. Yan, J. Han, and P. S. Yu,
Direct Discriminative Pattern Mining for Effective Classification, ICDE'08
W. Cohen. Fast effective rule induction. ICML'95
G. Cong, K.-L. Tan, A. K. H. Tung, and X. Xu. Mining top-k covering rule groups for
gene expression data. SIGMOD'05
74
References (2)
A. J. Dobson. An Introduction to Generalized Linear Models. Chapman & Hall, 1990.
G. Dong and J. Li. Efficient mining of emerging patterns: Discovering trends and
differences. KDD'99.
R. O. Duda, P. E. Hart, and D. G. Stork. Pattern Classification, 2ed. John Wiley, 2001
U. M. Fayyad. Branching on attribute values in decision tree generation. AAAI’94.
Y. Freund and R. E. Schapire. A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and
an application to boosting. J. Computer and System Sciences, 1997.
J. Gehrke, R. Ramakrishnan, and V. Ganti. Rainforest: A framework for fast decision tree
construction of large datasets. VLDB’98.
J. Gehrke, V. Gant, R. Ramakrishnan, and W.-Y. Loh, BOAT -- Optimistic Decision Tree
Construction. SIGMOD'99.
T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, and J. Friedman. The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data
Mining, Inference, and Prediction. Springer-Verlag, 2001.
D. Heckerman, D. Geiger, and D. M. Chickering. Learning Bayesian networks: The
combination of knowledge and statistical data. Machine Learning, 1995.
W. Li, J. Han, and J. Pei, CMAR: Accurate and Efficient Classification Based on Multiple
Class-Association Rules, ICDM'01.
75
References (3)
T.-S. Lim, W.-Y. Loh, and Y.-S. Shih. A comparison of prediction accuracy, complexity,
and training time of thirty-three old and new classification algorithms. Machine
Learning, 2000.
J. Magidson. The Chaid approach to segmentation modeling: Chi-squared
automatic interaction detection. In R. P. Bagozzi, editor, Advanced Methods of
Marketing Research, Blackwell Business, 1994.
M. Mehta, R. Agrawal, and J. Rissanen. SLIQ : A fast scalable classifier for data
mining. EDBT'96.
T. M. Mitchell. Machine Learning. McGraw Hill, 1997.
S. K. Murthy, Automatic Construction of Decision Trees from Data: A Multi-
Disciplinary Survey, Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 2(4): 345-389, 1998
J. R. Quinlan. Induction of decision trees. Machine Learning, 1:81-106, 1986.
J. R. Quinlan and R. M. Cameron-Jones. FOIL: A midterm report. ECML’93.
J. R. Quinlan. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.
J. R. Quinlan. Bagging, boosting, and c4.5. AAAI'96.
76
References (4)
R. Rastogi and K. Shim. Public: A decision tree classifier that integrates building and
pruning. VLDB’98.
J. Shafer, R. Agrawal, and M. Mehta. SPRINT : A scalable parallel classifier for data
mining. VLDB’96.
J. W. Shavlik and T. G. Dietterich. Readings in Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann,
1990.
P. Tan, M. Steinbach, and V. Kumar. Introduction to Data Mining. Addison Wesley,
2005.
S. M. Weiss and C. A. Kulikowski. Computer Systems that Learn: Classification and
Prediction Methods from Statistics, Neural Nets, Machine Learning, and Expert
Systems. Morgan Kaufman, 1991.
S. M. Weiss and N. Indurkhya. Predictive Data Mining. Morgan Kaufmann, 1997.
I. H. Witten and E. Frank. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and
Techniques, 2ed. Morgan Kaufmann, 2005.
X. Yin and J. Han. CPAR: Classification based on predictive association rules. SDM'03
H. Yu, J. Yang, and J. Han. Classifying large data sets using SVM with hierarchical
clusters. KDD'03.
77
CS412 Midterm Exam Statistics
Opinion Question Answering:
Like the style: 70.83%, dislike: 29.16%
80-89: 54 50-59: 15
70-79: 46 40-49: 2
Speed
time to construct the model (training time)
80
Predictor Error Measures
Measure predictor accuracy: measure how far off the predicted value is from
the actual known value
Loss function: measures the error betw. yi and the predicted value yi’
Absolute error: | yi – yi’|
Squared error: (yi – yi’)2
Test error (generalization error):
d the average loss over the test setd
| y i yi ' | (y i yi ' ) 2
Mean absolute error: i 1 Mean squared error: i 1
d d
d
d
| y i yi ' | ( yi yi ' ) 2
i 1
Relative absolute error: i 1
d Relative squared error: d
| y
i 1
i y|
(y
i 1
i y)2
tree earlier
RainForest (VLDB’98 — Gehrke, Ramakrishnan & Ganti)
Builds an AVC-list (attribute, value, class label)
82
Data Cube-Based Decision-Tree
Induction
Integration of generalization with decision-tree induction
(Kamber et al.’97)
Classification at primitive concept levels
E.g., precise temperature, humidity, outlook, etc.
Low-level concepts, scattered classes, bushy classification-
trees
Semantic interpretation problems
Cube-based multi-level classification
Relevance analysis at multi-levels
Information-gain analysis with dimension + level
83
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies: