The increasing volume of data in modern business and science calls for more complex and sophisticated tools. Although advances in data mining technology have made extensive data collection much easier, it's still always evolving and there is a constant need for new techniques and tools that can help us transform this data into useful information and knowledge. Since the previous edition's publication, great advances have been made in the field of data mining. Not only does the third of edition of Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques continue the tradition of equipping you with an understanding and application of the theory and practice of discovering patterns hidden in large data sets, it also focuses on new, important topics in the field: data warehouses and data cube technology, mining stream, mining social networks, and mining spatial, multimedia and other complex data. Each chapter is a stand-alone guide to a critical topic, presenting proven algorithms and sound implementations ready to be used directly or with strategic modification against live data. This is the resource you need if you want to apply today's most powerful data mining techniques to meet real business challenges. * Presents dozens of algorithms and implementation examples, all in pseudo-code and suitable for use in real-world, large-scale data mining projects. * Addresses advanced topics such as mining object-relational databases, spatial databases, multimedia databases, time-series databases, text databases, the World Wide Web, and applications in several fields. *Provides a comprehensive, practical look at the concepts and techniques you need to get the most out of real business data

/pdf/data-mining-concepts-and-techniques-4dtvdfkvmi.pdf

Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques

Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques offers a thorough grounding in machine learning concepts as well as practical advice on applying machine learning tools and techniques in real-world data mining situations. This highly anticipated third edition of the most acclaimed work on data mining and machine learning will teach you everything you need to know about preparing inputs, interpreting outputs, evaluating results, and the algorithmic methods at the heart of successful data mining. Thorough updates reflect the technical changes and modernizations that have taken place in the field since the last edition, including new material on Data Transformations, Ensemble Learning, Massive Data Sets, Multi-instance Learning, plus a new version of the popular Weka machine learning software developed by the authors. Witten, Frank, and Hall include both tried-and-true techniques of today as well as methods at the leading edge of contemporary research. *Provides a thorough grounding in machine learning concepts as well as practical advice on applying the tools and techniques to your data mining projects *Offers concrete tips and techniques for performance improvement that work by transforming the input or output in machine learning methods *Includes downloadable Weka software toolkit, a collection of machine learning algorithms for data mining tasks-in an updated, interactive interface. Algorithms in toolkit cover: data pre-processing, classification, regression, clustering, association rules, visualization

Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques

Machine Learning is the study of methods for programming computers to learn. Computers are applied to a wide range of tasks, and for most of these it is relatively easy for programmers to design and implement the necessary software. However, there are many tasks for which this is difficult or impossible. These can be divided into four general categories. First, there are problems for which there exist no human experts. For example, in modern automated manufacturing facilities, there is a need to predict machine failures before they occur by analyzing sensor readings. Because the machines are new, there are no human experts who can be interviewed by a programmer to provide the knowledge necessary to build a computer system. A machine learning system can study recorded data and subsequent machine failures and learn prediction rules. Second, there are problems where human experts exist, but where they are unable to explain their expertise. This is the case in many perceptual tasks, such as speech recognition, hand-writing recognition, and natural language understanding. Virtually all humans exhibit expert-level abilities on these tasks, but none of them can describe the detailed steps that they follow as they perform them. Fortunately, humans can provide machines with examples of the inputs and correct outputs for these tasks, so machine learning algorithms can learn to map the inputs to the outputs. Third, there are problems where phenomena are changing rapidly. In finance, for example, people would like to predict the future behavior of the stock market, of consumer purchases, or of exchange rates. These behaviors change frequently, so that even if a programmer could construct a good predictive computer program, it would need to be rewritten frequently. A learning program can relieve the programmer of this burden by constantly modifying and tuning a set of learned prediction rules. Fourth, there are applications that need to be customized for each computer user separately. Consider, for example, a program to filter unwanted electronic mail messages. Different users will need different filters. It is unreasonable to expect each user to program his or her own rules, and it is infeasible to provide every user with a software engineer to keep the rules up-to-date. A machine learning system can learn which mail messages the user rejects and maintain the filtering rules automatically. Machine learning addresses many of the same research questions as the fields of statistics, data mining, and psychology, but with differences of emphasis. Statistics focuses on understanding the phenomena that have generated the data, often with the goal of testing different hypotheses about those phenomena. Data mining seeks to find patterns in the data that are understandable by people. Psychological studies of human learning aspire to understand the mechanisms underlying the various learning behaviors exhibited by people (concept learning, skill acquisition, strategy change, etc.).

Machine learning

The R package mice imputes incomplete multivariate data by chained equations. The software mice 1.0 appeared in the year 2000 as an S-PLUS library, and in 2001 as an R package. mice 1.0 introduced predictor selection, passive imputation and automatic pooling. This article documents mice, which extends the functionality of mice 1.0 in several ways. In mice, the analysis of imputed data is made completely general, whereas the range of models under which pooling works is substantially extended. mice adds new functionality for imputing multilevel data, automatic predictor selection, data handling, post-processing imputed values, specialized pooling routines, model selection tools, and diagnostic graphs. Imputation of categorical data is improved in order to bypass problems caused by perfect prediction. Special attention is paid to transformations, sum scores, indices and interactions using passive imputation, and to the proper setup of the predictor matrix. mice can be downloaded from the Comprehensive R Archive Network. This article provides a hands-on, stepwise approach to solve applied incomplete data problems.

/pdf/mice-multivariate-imputation-by-chained-equations-in-r-2cffzza5jj.pdf

mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R

Probability Distributions.- Linear Models for Regression.- Linear Models for Classification.- Neural Networks.- Kernel Methods.- Sparse Kernel Machines.- Graphical Models.- Mixture Models and EM.- Approximate Inference.- Sampling Methods.- Continuous Latent Variables.- Sequential Data.- Combining Models.

Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning

We describe a Bayesian approach for learning Bayesian networks from a combination of prior knowledge and statistical data. First and foremost, we develop a methodology for assessing informative priors needed for learning. Our approach is derived from a set of assumptions made previously as well as the assumption of likelihood equivalence, which says that data should not help to discriminate network structures that represent the same assertions of conditional independence. We show that likelihood equivalence when combined with previously made assumptions implies that the user's priors for network parameters can be encoded in a single Bayesian network for the next case to be seen—a prior network—and a single measure of confidence for that network. Second, using these priors, we show how to compute the relative posterior probabilities of network structures given data. Third, we describe search methods for identifying network structures with high posterior probabilities. We describe polynomial algorithms for finding the highest-scoring network structures in the special case where every node has at most k e 1 parent. For the general case (k > 1), which is NP-hard, we review heuristic search algorithms including local search, iterative local search, and simulated annealing. Finally, we describe a methodology for evaluating Bayesian-network learning algorithms, and apply this approach to a comparison of various approaches.

/pdf/learning-bayesian-networks-the-combination-of-knowledge-and-5401ouuevj.pdf

Learning Bayesian Networks: The Combination of Knowledge and Statistical Data

In this paper we prove the so-called "Meek Conjecture". In particular, we show that if a DAG H is an independence map of another DAG G, then there exists a finite sequence of edge additions and covered edge reversals in G such that (1) after each edge modification H remains an independence map of G and (2) after all modifications G =H. As shown by Meek (1997), this result has an important consequence for Bayesian approaches to learning Bayesian networks from data: in the limit of large sample size, there exists a two-phase greedy search algorithm that---when applied to a particular sparsely-connected search space---provably identifies a perfect map of the generative distribution if that perfect map is a DAG. We provide a new implementation of the search space, using equivalence classes as states, for which all operators used in the greedy search can be scored efficiently using local functions of the nodes in the domain. Finally, using both synthetic and real-world datasets, we demonstrate that the two-phase greedy approach leads to good solutions when learning with finite sample sizes.

/pdf/optimal-structure-identification-with-greedy-search-3anleuuhup.pdf

Optimal structure identification with greedy search

Algorithms for learning Bayesian networks from data have two components: a scoring metric and a search procedure. The scoring metric computes a score reflecting the goodness-of-fit of the structure to the data. The search procedure tries to identify network structures with high scores. Heckerman et al. (1995) introduce a Bayesian metric, called the BDe metric, that computes the relative posterior probability of a network structure given data. In this paper, we show that the search problem of identifying a Bayesian network—among those where each node has at most K parents—that has a relative posterior probability greater than a given constant is NP-complete, when the BDe metric is used.

Learning Bayesian Networks is NP-Complete

Two Bayesian-network structures are said to be equivalent if the set of distributions that can be represented with one of those structures is identical to the set of distributions that can be represented with the other. Many scoring criteria that are used to learn Bayesian-network structures from data are score equivalent; that is, these criteria do not distinguish among networks that are equivalent. In this paper, we consider using a score equivalent criterion in conjunction with a heuristic search algorithm to perform model selection or model averaging. We argue that it is often appropriate to search among equivalence classes of network structures as opposed to the more common approach of searching among individual Bayesian-network structures. We describe a convenient graphical representation for an equivalence class of structures, and introduce a set of operators that can be applied to that representation by a search algorithm to move among equivalence classes. We show that our equivalence-class operators can be scored locally, and thus share the computational efficiency of traditional operators defined for individual structures. We show experimentally that a greedy model-selection algorithm using our representation yields slightly higher-scoring structures than the traditional approach without any additional time overhead, and we argue that more sophisticated search algorithms are likely to benefit much more.

/pdf/learning-equivalence-classes-of-bayesian-network-structures-3i8ki1p2q9.pdf

Learning equivalence classes of bayesian-network structures

In this paper, we provide new complexity results for algorithms that learn discrete-variable Bayesian networks from data. Our results apply whenever the learning algorithm uses a scoring criterion that favors the simplest structure for which the model is able to represent the generative distribution exactly. Our results therefore hold whenever the learning algorithm uses a consistent scoring criterion and is applied to a sufficiently large dataset. We show that identifying high-scoring structures is NP-hard, even when any combination of one or more of the following hold: the generative distribution is perfect with respect to some DAG containing hidden variables; we are given an independence oracle; we are given an inference oracle; we are given an information oracle; we restrict potential solutions to structures in which each node has at most k parents, for all k>=3.Our proof relies on a new technical result that we establish in the appendices. In particular, we provide a method for constructing the local distributions in a Bayesian network such that the resulting joint distribution is provably perfect with respect to the structure of the network.

/pdf/large-sample-learning-of-bayesian-networks-is-np-hard-57p6w1oskh.pdf

David Maxwell Chickering

Papers

Learning Bayesian Networks: The Combination of Knowledge and Statistical Data

Optimal structure identification with greedy search

Learning Bayesian Networks is NP-Complete

Learning equivalence classes of bayesian-network structures

Large-Sample Learning of Bayesian Networks is NP-Hard