Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
11/09/2011 GrC2011Decision Rule Visualization for KnowledgeDiscovery by Means of Rough Set ApproachMotoyuki Ohki, Masahiro...
00. Outline                                     1 / 2501. Background and Purpose02. Algorithm for Decision Rule Visualizat...
01. Background                  2 / 25Rough Set Approach- Attribute Reduction- Induce Decision RulesApplication to various...
01. Background                                                                      3 / 25A Decision Table                ...
01. Background                                                                          4 / 25Technical issue- Difficulty ...
01. Purpose                                                                                         5 /25           Propos...
02. Methods used in the proposed visualization   6 / 25Three Methods(i) The decision matrix-based rule induction(ii) Calcu...
02. Co-occurrence Rate                                     7 / 25Definition- Degrees of the dependencies “between attribut...
02. Co-occurrence Rate                                                                 8 / 25Calculation Example          ...
02. Hayashi’s Quantification Method Ⅳ                         9 / 25Definition- A kind of multi-dimensional scaling- Plot ...
02. Flow of the Decision Rule Visualization                              10 / 25Input                                     ...
02. Flow of the Decision Rule Visualization                             11 / 25Input                                      ...
02. Flow of the Decision Rule Visualization                    12 / 25Input                                           A de...
03. Visualization System                                   13 / 25     c1      0.500  Strongly dependent  with the conclus...
04. Evaluation Experiment                                    14 / 25Two evaluation experiments- We check the efficiency an...
04. Product Evaluation Experiment                    15 / 25Procedure 1Samples and attribute values  - 24 digital cameras ...
04. Product Evaluation Experiment                                                           16 / 25Procedure 3We compare t...
04. Product Evaluation Experiment                                    17 / 25Evaluation of Commercial Software List of deci...
04. Product Evaluation Experiment       18 / 25Evaluation of Visualization System1. It is easy to understand the   strengt...
04. Product Evaluation Experiment       19 / 25Evaluation of Visualization System2. We can find a weakly related   conditi...
04. Product Evaluation Experiment                                       20 / 25Evaluation of Visualization System3. The le...
04. Numerical Experiment                                                        21 / 25Procedure 1Partion “car” data set i...
04. Numerical Experiment                           22 / 25Procedure 2Ask each of three examinees to select three decisionr...
04. Numerical Experiment                                   23 / 25Procedure 3Compare the selected three decision rules(Rul...
04. Numerical Experiment                         24 / 25Results of Average Accuracy                              By the pa...
05. Summary and Future Work                                 25 / 25Summary1. We proposed a method of visualizing decision ...
Thank you for listening !Motoyuki OhkiGraduate School of Engineering Science, Osaka UniversityE-Mail : ohki@inulab.sys.es....
Appendix
00. Samples and Attribute       24 digital cameras   7 attribute values
00. Conventional Research  Multi-valued decision diagrams [1]  - This method uses a multi-valued    decision diagram.  Hie...
00. Co-occurrence Rate                              30 / 14The reason of selecting Jaccard coefficient- Attribute value X ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

11.11.08_GrC2011_Decision Rule Visualization for Knowledge Discovery by Means of Rough Set Approach

373 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

11.11.08_GrC2011_Decision Rule Visualization for Knowledge Discovery by Means of Rough Set Approach

  1. 1. 11/09/2011 GrC2011Decision Rule Visualization for KnowledgeDiscovery by Means of Rough Set ApproachMotoyuki Ohki, Masahiro Inuiguchi, Toshinobu HaradaGraduate School of Engineering Science, Osaka UniversityFaculty of Systems Engineering, Wakayama University
  2. 2. 00. Outline 1 / 2501. Background and Purpose02. Algorithm for Decision Rule Visualization03. Visualization System04. Evaluation Experiment05. Summary and Future Work
  3. 3. 01. Background 2 / 25Rough Set Approach- Attribute Reduction- Induce Decision RulesApplication to various fields
  4. 4. 01. Background 3 / 25A Decision Table Decision rule:If “b1” then “1” The numberSample Color (a) Shape (b) Type (d) Preference of doors (c) car1 colored (a1) nature (b1) two (c1) personal (d1) Id like to buy (1) car2 colored (a1) rounded (b2) four (c2) sporty (d2) I dont know (2) car3 monochrome (a2) rounded (b2) four (c2) formal (d3) I dont know (2) car4 monochrome (a2) nature (b1) four (c2) personal (d1) Id like to buy (1) car5 monochrome (a2) rounded (b2) two (c1) personal (d1) I dont know (2) car6 colored (a1) rounded (b2) two (c1) sporty (d2) Id like to buy (1) Decision rule:If “a1 and d2” then “1” We select useful decision rules among many rules. We apply the rules to actual problems.
  5. 5. 01. Background 4 / 25Technical issue- Difficulty of interpretation- Depending on analysts Difficulty of findingusuful decision rules ... An example of inducing decision rules[1] [1] HOLON CREATE, Rough Sets Analysis Program, http://www.holon.com/program.html
  6. 6. 01. Purpose 5 /25 Proposing Algorithm for Visualization of Decision Rule in Rough Set Approach Supporting discovery of useful decision ruleExamples of visual data mining [1,2,3] [1] SOM Self-organization maps http://www.mindware-jp.com/Viscovery/self-organizing-maps.html [2] Purple Insight MineSet http://journal.mycom.co.jp/news/2006/06/28/347.html [3] Natto View http://www.holon.com/program.html
  7. 7. 02. Methods used in the proposed visualization 6 / 25Three Methods(i) The decision matrix-based rule induction(ii) Calculation of Co-occurrence Rates(iii) Hayashi’s Quantification Method ⅣWe evaluate the dependencies between attributevalues and conclusions quantitatively.
  8. 8. 02. Co-occurrence Rate 7 / 25Definition- Degrees of the dependencies “between attribute values” and “between attribute values and conclusion”- Jaccard coefficientFormula , |X| : cardinality of set X
  9. 9. 02. Co-occurrence Rate 8 / 25Calculation Example The numberSample Color (a) Shape (b) Type (d) Preference of doors (c) car1 colored (a1) nature (b1) two (c1) personal (d1) Id like to buy (1) car2 colored (a1) rounded (b2) four (c2) sporty (d2) I dont know (2) car3 monochrome (a2) rounded (b2) four (c2) formal (d3) I dont know (2) car4 monochrome (a2) nature (b1) four (c2) personal (d1) Id like to buy (1) car5 monochrome (a2) rounded (b2) two (c1) personal (d1) I dont know (2) car6 colored (a1) rounded (b2) two (c1) sporty (d2) Id like to buy (1)the rate between “a1” and “b1”
  10. 10. 02. Hayashi’s Quantification Method Ⅳ 9 / 25Definition- A kind of multi-dimensional scaling- Plot all objects in the two dimensional coordinate systemAlgorithm :
  11. 11. 02. Flow of the Decision Rule Visualization 10 / 25Input A decision tableAnalysis Calculate Jaccard coefficients between attribute values Apply Hayashi’s quantification method 1. We obtain the locations of attribute values in X-Y coordinate.Output Attribute values
  12. 12. 02. Flow of the Decision Rule Visualization 11 / 25Input A decision tableAnalysis Calculate Jaccard coefficients between attribute values and conclusion 2. We obtain the location of attribute values in Z coordinates.Output
  13. 13. 02. Flow of the Decision Rule Visualization 12 / 25Input A decision tableAnalysis Induce decision rules by rough set approach Calculate C.I values 3. Decision rules are represented as links. b2 Decision Rule:a1b2Output a1
  14. 14. 03. Visualization System 13 / 25 c1 0.500 Strongly dependent with the conclusion Decision rule : c1d3 Candidate for the useful decision rules Decision table - Attribute values : 16 - Induced decision rules : 31
  15. 15. 04. Evaluation Experiment 14 / 25Two evaluation experiments- We check the efficiency and usefulness of visualization method.[1] Product evaluation experiment - To check the advantage of visualization method[2] Numerical experiment - To check the usefulness of decision rules selected by examinees utilizing the visualization system
  16. 16. 04. Product Evaluation Experiment 15 / 25Procedure 1Samples and attribute values - 24 digital cameras as samples - 7 condition attributes ex) Face shape, Position of lens … etc.Procedure 2We ask three examinees about buying motivation of thesedigital cameras. - conclusion 1 : “I want to buy it” - conclusion 2 : “I will not buy it”
  17. 17. 04. Product Evaluation Experiment 16 / 25Procedure 3We compare the advantage of selecting decision rulesby the following two methods. - one : Proposed Visualization Method - the other : Commercial Software provided by HOLON[1] Comparison [1] HOLON CREATE Rough Sets Analysis Program http://www.holon.com/program.html
  18. 18. 04. Product Evaluation Experiment 17 / 25Evaluation of Commercial Software List of decision rules with C.I values Decision Rules C.I value e2f3 0.167 b2f2 0.167 Difficulty in finding the useful a2d2 0.167 c1f1g2 0.167 decision rules b1c1f1 0.167 a2f2g1 0.167 The selected decision rules are different a2b1e2 0.167 among examinees. b2e1 0.083 d2f3 0.083 a1d3 0.083 Decision rules and C.I values induced by a commercial software
  19. 19. 04. Product Evaluation Experiment 18 / 25Evaluation of Visualization System1. It is easy to understand the strength of dependencies at one look. Examples- e2 (no dial, Z-value = 0.450)- c1 (shape of face is straight line, Z-value = 0.429)- g2 (shape of edge strip is rounded, Z-value = 0.412)
  20. 20. 04. Product Evaluation Experiment 19 / 25Evaluation of Visualization System2. We can find a weakly related condition attribute values. Examples- f1, f2, and f3 are located lower position- “f” (location of flash) is not very influential for this examinee’s preference.
  21. 21. 04. Product Evaluation Experiment 20 / 25Evaluation of Visualization System3. The length of linkes can e2 express imbalanced influence of attribute values. b1 a2 Examples- “e2f3” : long link→ unreliable decision rule- “a2b1e2” : short link→ reliable decision rule f3 Decision rules composed by three attribute values Decision rules composed by two attribute values
  22. 22. 04. Numerical Experiment 21 / 25Procedure 1Partion “car” data set into ten subsets randomly- “car” data set : obtained from UCI web site*1+ 1 2 3 10 [1] UCI Machine Learning Repository http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/
  23. 23. 04. Numerical Experiment 22 / 25Procedure 2Ask each of three examinees to select three decisionrules to each subsets of “car” data set a1c3 b1d2 a1c2 a1d2 a1c3 d2b1 a1c3 d2b1 b1d2
  24. 24. 04. Numerical Experiment 23 / 25Procedure 3Compare the selected three decision rules(Rule Set 1) with non-selected decision rules(Rule Set 2) having the same C.I values Rule Set 1 Rule Set 2 a1d2, a1c3, b1d2 c2d2, b3c3 … 1 2 9 1 2 9 Calculation of Average Accuracy
  25. 25. 04. Numerical Experiment 24 / 25Results of Average Accuracy By the paired t-test with significance level α = 0.05, we confirmed the advantage of Rule Set 1 to Rule Set 2. We confirmed the usefulness of the proposed method.
  26. 26. 05. Summary and Future Work 25 / 25Summary1. We proposed a method of visualizing decision rules2. We developed a visualization system based on the proposed method3. We conducted two experiments. We confirmed the effectiveness and usefulness of the visualization system.Future Work1. To conduct more experiments with many different decision tables.2. To improve the system in order to enhance the precision of analysis method.
  27. 27. Thank you for listening !Motoyuki OhkiGraduate School of Engineering Science, Osaka UniversityE-Mail : ohki@inulab.sys.es.osaka-u.ac.jp
  28. 28. Appendix
  29. 29. 00. Samples and Attribute 24 digital cameras 7 attribute values
  30. 30. 00. Conventional Research Multi-valued decision diagrams [1] - This method uses a multi-valued decision diagram. Hierarchical visualization method[2] - This method uses a hierarchical graph structure.*1+ Y. Tomoto, T. Ohira, T. Nakamura, M. Kanoh, and H. Itoh, “Applying Multi-valued Decision Diagram toVisualization of If-Then Rules” Kansei Engineering International Journal, vol.9, no.2, 2010, pp.259-267.*2+ A. Ito, T. Yoshikawa, T. Furuhashi, S. Mitsumatsu,“Profiling by Association Analysis using Hierarchical Visualization Method” Kansei Engineering International Journal, vol.10, no.2, 2011, pp.205-212.
  31. 31. 00. Co-occurrence Rate 30 / 14The reason of selecting Jaccard coefficient- Attribute value X and attribute value YFor example(1) |X| = 100, |Y| = 1, |X∩Y| = 1, |X∪Y| = 100Jaccard = 1/100 Simpson = 1Cosine = 1/10 Dice = 2/101(2) |X| = 100, |Y| = 100, |X∩Y| = 50, |X∪Y| = 150Jaccard = 1/3 Simpson = 1/2Cosine = 1/2 Dice = 1/2

×