MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170595610 · doi:10.1109/tkde.2004.1269594

CAIM discretization algorithm

2004· article· en· W2170595610 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscretizationDiscretization of continuous featuresAlgorithmComputer scienceDecision treeClass (philosophy)Tree (set theory)ID3 algorithmDecision tree learningArtificial intelligenceIncremental decision treeMathematicsDiscretization error

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The task of extracting knowledge from databases is quite often performed by machine learning algorithms. The majority of these algorithms can be applied only to data described by discrete numerical or nominal attributes (features). In the case of continuous attributes, there is a need for a discretization algorithm that transforms continuous attributes into discrete ones. We describe such an algorithm, called CAIM (class-attribute interdependence maximization), which is designed to work with supervised data. The goal of the CAIM algorithm is to maximize the class-attribute interdependence and to generate a (possibly) minimal number of discrete intervals. The algorithm does not require the user to predefine the number of intervals, as opposed to some other discretization algorithms. The tests performed using CAIM and six other state-of-the-art discretization algorithms show that discrete attributes generated by the CAIM algorithm almost always have the lowest number of intervals and the highest class-attribute interdependency. Two machine learning algorithms, the CLIP4 rule algorithm and the decision tree algorithm, are used to generate classification rules from data discretized by CAIM. For both the CLIP4 and decision tree algorithms, the accuracy of the generated rules is higher and the number of the rules is lower for data discretized using the CAIM algorithm when compared to data discretized using six other discretization algorithms. The highest classification accuracy was achieved for data sets discretized with the CAIM algorithm, as compared with the other six algorithms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it