MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008429170 · doi:10.3233/jifs-179666

An efficient algorithm for fuzzy frequent itemset mining

2020· article· en· W3008429170 on OpenAlexaff
Tsu‐Yang Wu, Jerry Chun‐Wei Lin, Unil Yun, Chun-Hao Chen, Gautam Srivastava, Xianbiao Lv

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApriori algorithmData miningComputer scienceAssociation rule learningFuzzy setFuzzy logicA priori and a posterioriSet (abstract data type)Field (mathematics)Task (project management)Fuzzy set operationsKnowledge extractionMachine learningArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Association-rule mining (ARM) has concerned as an important and critical research issue in the field of data analytics and mining that aims at finding the correlations among the items in binary databases. However, the conventional algorithms considered the frequency of the item(set) in binary databases for ARM, which is not sufficient in real-life situations. Mining of useful information is not an easy task especially if the item(set) consists of the added values. Moreover, the discovered knowledge is not easy to understand if you are not the domain experts. For the past decades, several intelligent systems involved the fuzzy-set theory for many domains and applications due to it is interpretable for human reasoning. Before, the Apriori-based method for discovering fuzzy frequent itemsets (FFIs) based on the type-2 fuzzy-set theory was proposed, which requires the amount of computations with enormous candidates. In this study, we then first present a fast list-based multiple fuzzy frequent itemset mining (named as LFFT2)algorithm under type-2 fuzzy-set theory. It is developed by the type-2 membership functions to retrieve the multiple fuzzy frequent itemsets for presenting more useful and meaningful knowledge for making the efficient strategies or decisions. From the results shown in the experiments, it is clear to see that the developed LFFT2 outperforms the conventional Apriori-based approach regarding the execution time and the number of examined nodes in the search space.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy SystemsSame topicData Mining Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207