The Identification of Low-Paying Workplaces: An Analysis Using the Variable Precision Rough Sets Model

  • Malcolm J. Beynon
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2475)

Abstract

The identification of workplaces (establishments) most likely to pay low wages is an essential component of effectively monitoring a minimum wage. The main method utilised in this paper is the Variable Precision Rough Sets (VPRS) model, which constructs a set of decision ‘if... then...’ rules. These rules are easily readable by non-specialists and predict the proportion of low paid employees in an establishment. Through a ‘leave n out’ approach a standard error on the predictive accuracy of the sets of rules is calculated, also the importance of the descriptive characteristics is exposited based on their use. To gauge the effectiveness of the VPRS analysis, comparisons are made to a series of decision tree analyses.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    An, A., Shan, N., Chan, C., Cercone, N., Ziarko, W.: Discovering rules for water demand prediction: An enhanced rough-set approach. Engineering Application and Artificial Intelligence 9 (1996) 645–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beynon, M.: An Investigation of β-reduct Selection within the Variable Precision Rough Sets Model. In: The Second International Conference on Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence Series, Springer-Verlag (2000) 114–122Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beynon, M.: Reducts within the Variable Precision Rough Set Model. A Further Investigation. European Journal of Operational Research 134 (2001) 592–605.MATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Low Pay Commission: The National Minimum Wage: The Story So Far: Second Report of the Low Pay Commission. Cm 4571, London: HMSO (2000).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    McNabb, R., Whitfield, K.: ‘Worth So Appallingly Little’: A Workplace-level of Low pay. British Journal of Industrial Relations 38 (2000) 585–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Slowinski, R., Stefanowski, J.: RoughDAS and RoughClass software implementations of the rough sets approach. in Intelligent Decision Support, Applications and Advances of the Rough Sets Theory, ed. R. Slowinski, Kluwer, Academic Publishers, London (1992).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stefanowski, J.: Classification support based on the rough set theory. Proc. IIASA Workshop on User-Oriented Methodlogy and Techniques of Decision Analysis and Support, Serock (1992).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Quinlan, J.R.: Introduction of Decision trees. Machine Learning 1 (1986) 81–106.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ziarko, W.: Variable precision rough set model. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 46 (1993) 39–59.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zighed, D.A., Rabaseda, S., Rakotomala, S.: FUSINTER: A method for discretisation of continuous attributes, International Journal of Uncertainty. Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems 6 (1998) 307–326.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Malcolm J. Beynon
    • 1
  1. 1.Cardiff Business SchoolCardiff UniversityWalesUK

Personalised recommendations