Machine Learning Proceedings 1995 1995
DOI: 10.1016/b978-1-55860-377-6.50032-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Supervised and Unsupervised Discretization of Continuous Features

Abstract: Many supervised machine learning algorithms require a discrete feature space. In this paper, we review previous work on continuous feature discretization, identify de ning characteristics of the methods, and conduct an empirical evaluation of several methods. We compare binning, an unsupervised discretization method, to entropy-based and purity-based methods, which are supervised algorithms. We found that the performance of the Naive-Bayes algorithm signi cantly improved when features were discretized using an… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
866
1
23

Year Published

2000
2000
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1,386 publications
(930 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
9
866
1
23
Order By: Relevance
“…For some tables, taking into account the small number of their objects, we have adopted the approach based on five-fold crossvalidation (CV − 5). The obtained results (Table 3) can be compared with those reported in [21,69] (Table 2). For predicting decisions on new cases we apply only decision rules generated either by the decision tree (using hyperplanes) or by rules generated in parallel with discretization.…”
Section: Feature Extraction: Discretization and Symbolic Attribute Vamentioning
confidence: 52%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For some tables, taking into account the small number of their objects, we have adopted the approach based on five-fold crossvalidation (CV − 5). The obtained results (Table 3) can be compared with those reported in [21,69] (Table 2). For predicting decisions on new cases we apply only decision rules generated either by the decision tree (using hyperplanes) or by rules generated in parallel with discretization.…”
Section: Feature Extraction: Discretization and Symbolic Attribute Vamentioning
confidence: 52%
“…For predicting decisions on new cases we apply only decision rules generated either by the decision tree (using hyperplanes) or by rules generated in parallel with discretization. For some tables the classification quality of our algorithm is better than that of the C4.5 or Naive-Bayes induction algorithms [100] even when used with different discretization methods [21,69,15].…”
Section: Feature Extraction: Discretization and Symbolic Attribute Vamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Discretization has been widely studied from both a general point of view [26,27] and aimed specifically at BNs [28,29] and classification problems [30,31]. Discretization amounts to replacing a continuous variable X in a model by its discrete counterpart X 0 .…”
Section: Discretizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our encoding of ordinal features into binary features is reminiscent of machine learning algorithms for discretizing a continuous (i.e., real-valued) feature t k (see [5] for a survey and experimental comparison of less-than-recent methods, and [6,7] for two more recent surveys). These algorithms attempt to optimally subdivide the interval [α k , β k ] on which a feature t k ranges (where the interval [α k , β k ] may or may not be the same for all features in the feature space) into…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%