This paper presents the performance of a classifier built using the stackingC algorithm in nine different data sets. Each data set is generated using a sampling technique applied on the original imbalanced data set. Five new sampling techniques are proposed in this paper (i.e., SMOTERandRep, Lax Random Oversampling, Lax Random Undersampling, Combined-Lax Random Oversampling Undersampling, and Combined-Lax Random Undersampling Oversampling) that were based on the three sampling techniques (i.e., Random Undersampling, Random Oversampling, and Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique) usually used as solutions in imbalance learning. The metrics used to evaluate the classifier's performance were F-measure and G-mean. Fmeasure determines the performance of the classifier for every class, while G-mean measures the overall performance of the classifier. The results using F-measure showed that for the data without a sampling technique, the classifier's performance is good only for the majority class. It also showed that among the eight sampling techniques, RU and LRU have the worst performance while other techniques (i.e., RO, C-LRUO and C-LROU) performed well only on some classes. The best performing techniques in all data sets were SMOTE, SMOTERandRep, and LRO having the lowest Fmeasure values between 0.5 and 0.65. The results using Gmean showed that the oversampling technique that attained the highest G-mean value is LRO (0.86), next is C-LROU (0.85), then SMOTE (0.84) and finally is SMOTERandRep (0.83). Combining the result of the two metrics (F-measure and G-mean), only the three sampling techniques are considered as good performing (i.e., LRO, SMOTE, and SMOTERan-dRep)

In learning to classify streaming data, obtaining true labels may require major effort and may incur excessive cost. Active learning focuses on carefully selecting as few labeled instances as possible for learning an accurate predictive model. Streaming data poses additional challenges for active learning, since the data distribution may change over time (concept drift) and models need to adapt. Conventional active learning strategies concentrate on querying the most uncertain instances, which are typically concentrated around the decision boundary. Changes occurring further from the boundary may be missed, and models may fail to adapt. This paper presents a theoretically supported framework for active learning from drifting data streams and develops three active learning strategies for streaming data that explicitly handle concept drift. They are based on uncertainty, dynamic allocation of labeling efforts over time, and randomization of the search space. We empirically demonstrate that these strategies react well to changes that can occur anywhere in the instance space and unexpectedly.

The Weka workbench is an organized collection of state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms and data preprocessing tools. The basic way of interacting with these methods is by invoking them from the command line. However, convenient interactive graphical user interfaces are provided for data exploration, for setting up large-scale experiments on distributed computing platforms, and for designing configurations for streamed data processing. These interfaces constitute an advanced environment for experimental data mining. The system is written in Java and distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License.

No abstract

Abstract. This paper presents empirical results for several versions of the multinomial naive Bayes classifier on four text categorization problems, and a way of improving it using locally weighted learning. More specifically, it compares standard multinomial naive Bayes to the recently proposed transformed weight-normalized complement naive Bayes classifier (TWCNB) [1], and shows that some of the modifications included in TWCNB may not be necessary to achieve optimum performance on some datasets. However, it does show that TFIDF conversion and document length normalization are important. It also shows that support vector machines can, in fact, sometimes very significantly outperform both methods. Finally, it shows how the performance of multinomial naive Bayes can be improved using locally weighted learning. However, the overall conclusion of our paper is that support vector machines are still the method of choice if the aim is to maximize accuracy.