Encyclopedia of Database Systems

2018 Edition
| Editors: Ling Liu, M. Tamer Özsu

Closed Itemset Mining and Nonredundant Association Rule Mining

  • Mohammed J. Zaki
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_66

Synonyms

Frequent concepts; Rule bases

Definition

Let I be a set of binary-valued attributes, called items. A set XI is called an itemset. A transaction database D is a multiset of itemsets, where each itemset, called a transaction, has a unique identifier, called a tid. The support of an itemset X in a dataset D, denoted sup(X), is the fraction of transactions in D where X appears as a subset. X is said to be a frequent itemset in D if sup(X) ≥ minsup, where minsup is a user defined minimum support threshold. An (frequent) itemset is called closed if it has no (frequent) superset having the same support.

An association rule is an expression AB, where A and B are itemsets, and AB =∅. The support of the rule is the joint probability of a transaction containing both A and B, given as sup(AB) = P(AB) = sup(AB). The confidence of a rule is the conditional probability that a transaction contains B, given that it contains A, given as: \( conf\left(A\Rightarrow...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Bastide Y, Pasquier N, Taouil R, Stumme G, Lakhal L. Mining minimal non-redundant association rules using frequent closed itemsets. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Computational Logic; 2000. p. 972–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Calders T, Rigotti C, Boulicaut J-F. A survey on condensed representation for frequent sets. In: Boulicaut J-F, De Raedt L, Mannila H, editors. Constraint-based mining and inductive databases, LNCS, vol. 3848. Berlin: Springer; 2005. p. 64–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ganter B, Wille R. Formal concept analysis: mathematical foundations. Berlin/Heidelberg/New York: Springer; 1999.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goethals B, Zaki MJ. Advances in frequent itemset mining implementations: report on FIMI’03. SIGKDD Explor. 2003;6(1):109–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Guigues JL, Duquenne V. Familles minimales d'implications informatives resultant d'un tableau de donnees binaires. Math Sci Hum. 1986;24(95):5–18.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Luxenburger M. Implications partielles dans un contexte. Math Inf Sci Hum. 1991;29(113):35–55.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pasquier N, Bastide Y, Taouil R, Lakhal L. Discovering frequent closed itemsets for association rules. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Database Theory; 1999. p. 398–416.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pei J, Han J, Mao R. Closet: an efficient algorithm for mining frequent closed itemsets. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD Workshop on Research Issues in Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery; 2000. p.~21–30.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zaki MJ. Generating non-redundant association rules. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining; 2000. p. 34–43.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zaki MJ, Hsiao CJ. CHARM: an efficient algorithm for closed itemset mining. In: Proceedings of the SIAM International Conference on Data Mining; 2002. p. 457–73.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zaki MJ, Ogihara M. Theoretical foundations of association rules. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD Workshop on Research Issues in Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery; 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rensselaer Polytechnic InstituteTroyUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Jian Pei
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computing ScienceSimon Fraser Univ.BurnabyCanada