Skip to main content

Using knowledge-assisted discriminant analysis to generate new comparative terms

  • Conference paper
Selecting Models from Data

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Statistics ((LNS,volume 89))

  • 498 Accesses

Abstract

In this paper we present a method — knowledge-assisted discriminant analysis — to generate new comparative terms on symbolic and numeric attributes. The method has been implemented and tested on three real-world databases: mushroom classification, letter recognition, and liver disorder diagnosis. The experiment results show that combining AI and statistical techniques is an effective and efficient way to enhance a machine learning system’s concept description language in order to learn simple and comprehensible rules.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

  1. L. Breiman, J.H. Friedman, RA. Olshen, and C.J. Stone. In Classification and regression Trees. Wadsworth, Belmont, CA, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  2. B.G. Buchanan and T.M. Mitchell. Model-directed learning of production rules. In D.A. Waterman and F. Hayes-Roth, editors, Pattern-Directed Inference Systems. Academic, New York, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  3. S. H. Clearwater, H. Hirsh, T. R Cheng, and B. G. Buchanan. Overcoming inadequate concept description languages. Technical Report Tech. Rept. ISL-88-4, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  4. S. H. Clearwater and F. J. Provost. RL4: A tool for knowledge-based induction. Washington DC, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  5. T.G. Dietterich and R.S. Michalski. A comparative review of selected methods for learning from examples. In J.G. Carbonell, R.S. Michalski and T.M. Mitchell, editors, Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach, pages 41–82. Tioga, Palo Alto, CA, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  6. L.M. Fu and B.G. Buchanan. Learning intermediate concepts in constructing a hierarchical knowledge base, pages 659–666, Philadelphia, PA, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Flann and T.G. Dietterich. Selecting appropriate representations for learning from examples. Proceedings of the AAAI-89, pages 460–466, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  8. R.A. Fisher. The use of multiple measurement in taxonomic problems. Ann. Eugenics., 7: 179–188, 1936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. P.W. Frey and D.J. Slate. Letter recognition using holland-style adaptive classifiers. Machine Learning, 6: 161–182, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  10. L.M. Fu. Learning Object-Level Knowledge in Expert Systems. Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  11. D.J. Hand. Discrimination and Classification. J. Weiley, New York, 1981.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. W.R. Klecka. Discriminant Analysis. Sage Publications, Beverly Hill, CA, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  13. P.A. Lachenbruch. Discriminant Analysis. Hafner Press, New York, 1975.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. B. Leng and B.G. Buchanan. Constructive induction on symbolic features: Introducing new comparative terms, pages 163–167. Morgan Kaufmann, June 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  15. B. Leng and B.G. Buchanan. Extending inductive methods to create practical tools for building expert systems. 4th International Conference on Tools for Artificial Intelligence, November 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bing Leng and Bruch G. Buchanan. Using knowledge-assisted discriminant analysis to generate new comparative terms. Technical Report Tech. Rept. ISL-92–15, Univ. of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA., September 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  17. K.F. Lee and S. Mahajan. A pattern classification approach to evaluation function learning. Artificial Intelligence, 36: 1–25, 1988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. P. Langley, H.A. Simon, G.L. Bradshaw, and J.M. Zytkow. Scientific Discovery: Computational Explorations of the Creative Process. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  19. T. Mitchell. Version Spaces: An Approach to Concept Learning. Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  20. R.S. Michalski and J. Larson. Incremental generation of VL1 hypotheses: The underlying methodology and the description of the program AQ11. Technical Report Tech. Rept. ISG 83-5, Urbana, IL, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  21. C.J. Matheus and L.A. Rendell. Constructive induction on decision trees, pages 645–650, Detroit, MI, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  22. S. Muggleton. DUCE, an oracle based approach to constructive induction, pages 287–292, Milan, Italy, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  23. G. Pagallo. Learning DNF by decision trees. Detroit, MI, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  24. J. R. Quinlan. Induction of decision trees. Machine Learning, 1: 81–106, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  25. L. Rendell. Substantial constructive induction using layered information compression: Tractable feature formation in search, pages 650–658, Los Angeles, CA, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  26. L. Rendell. Learning hard concepts. Proceedings of the Third European Working Session on Learning, pages 177–200, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  27. J. Schlimmer. Concept acquisition through representational adjustment. Technical Report Tech. Rept. No. 87–19, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  28. J.C. Schlimmer. Incremental adjustment of representations in learning, pages 79–90, Irvine, CA, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  29. J.W. Shavlik, R.J. Mooney, and G.G. Towell. Symbolic and neural learning algorithms: An experimental comparison. Machine Learning, 6: 111–143, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  30. PE. Utgoff. Perceptron trees: A case study in hybrid concept representations, pages 601–606, St. Paul, MN, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1994 Springer-Verlag New York

About this paper

Cite this paper

Leng, B., Buchanan, B.G. (1994). Using knowledge-assisted discriminant analysis to generate new comparative terms. In: Cheeseman, P., Oldford, R.W. (eds) Selecting Models from Data. Lecture Notes in Statistics, vol 89. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2660-4_49

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2660-4_49

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-94281-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4612-2660-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics