Outlier detection using flexible categorization and interrogative agendas

IF 6.7 1区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Decision Support Systems Pub Date : 2024-02-19 DOI:10.1016/j.dss.2024.114196
Marcel Boersma , Krishna Manoorkar , Alessandra Palmigiano , Mattia Panettiere , Apostolos Tzimoulis , Nachoem Wijnberg
{"title":"Outlier detection using flexible categorization and interrogative agendas","authors":"Marcel Boersma ,&nbsp;Krishna Manoorkar ,&nbsp;Alessandra Palmigiano ,&nbsp;Mattia Panettiere ,&nbsp;Apostolos Tzimoulis ,&nbsp;Nachoem Wijnberg","doi":"10.1016/j.dss.2024.114196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Categorization is one of the basic tasks in machine learning and data analysis. Building on formal concept analysis (FCA), the starting point of the present work is that different ways to categorize a given set of objects exist, which depend on the choice of the sets of features used to classify them, and different such sets of features may yield better or worse categorizations, relative to the task at hand. In their turn, the (a priori) choice of a particular set of features over another might be subjective and express a certain epistemic stance (e.g. interests, relevance, preferences) of an agent or a group of agents, namely, their <em>interrogative agenda</em>. In the present paper, we represent interrogative agendas as sets of features, and explore and compare different ways to categorize objects w.r.t. different sets of features (agendas). We first develop a simple unsupervised FCA-based algorithm for outlier detection which uses categorizations arising from different agendas. We then present a supervised meta-learning algorithm to learn suitable (fuzzy) agendas for categorization as sets of features with different weights or masses. We combine this meta-learning algorithm with the unsupervised outlier detection algorithm to obtain a supervised outlier detection algorithm. We show that these algorithms perform at par with commonly used algorithms for outlier detection on commonly used datasets in outlier detection. These algorithms provide both local and global explanations of their results.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55181,"journal":{"name":"Decision Support Systems","volume":"180 ","pages":"Article 114196"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167923624000290/pdfft?md5=f4351ba063013ce829fe29a04ac1de27&pid=1-s2.0-S0167923624000290-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Decision Support Systems","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167923624000290","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Categorization is one of the basic tasks in machine learning and data analysis. Building on formal concept analysis (FCA), the starting point of the present work is that different ways to categorize a given set of objects exist, which depend on the choice of the sets of features used to classify them, and different such sets of features may yield better or worse categorizations, relative to the task at hand. In their turn, the (a priori) choice of a particular set of features over another might be subjective and express a certain epistemic stance (e.g. interests, relevance, preferences) of an agent or a group of agents, namely, their interrogative agenda. In the present paper, we represent interrogative agendas as sets of features, and explore and compare different ways to categorize objects w.r.t. different sets of features (agendas). We first develop a simple unsupervised FCA-based algorithm for outlier detection which uses categorizations arising from different agendas. We then present a supervised meta-learning algorithm to learn suitable (fuzzy) agendas for categorization as sets of features with different weights or masses. We combine this meta-learning algorithm with the unsupervised outlier detection algorithm to obtain a supervised outlier detection algorithm. We show that these algorithms perform at par with commonly used algorithms for outlier detection on commonly used datasets in outlier detection. These algorithms provide both local and global explanations of their results.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用灵活的分类和询问议程检测离群值
分类是机器学习和数据分析的基本任务之一。在形式概念分析(FCA)的基础上,本研究工作的出发点是,对一组给定对象进行分类存在不同的方法,这取决于对用于对其进行分类的特征集的选择,相对于手头的任务而言,不同的特征集可能产生更好或更差的分类结果。反过来,(先验地)选择一组特定的特征而不是另一组,可能是主观的,表达了一个或一组代理人的某种认识论立场(如兴趣、相关性、偏好),即他们的询问议程。在本文中,我们将询问议程表示为特征集,并探索和比较了根据不同特征集(议程)对对象进行分类的不同方法。我们首先开发了一种基于 FCA 的简单无监督算法,用于离群点检测,该算法使用由不同议程产生的分类。然后,我们提出了一种有监督的元学习算法,以学习合适的(模糊)议程,将其归类为具有不同权重或质量的特征集。我们将这种元学习算法与无监督离群点检测算法相结合,得到了一种有监督的离群点检测算法。我们证明,在离群点检测的常用数据集上,这些算法与常用的离群点检测算法性能相当。这些算法对其结果提供了局部和全局的解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Decision Support Systems
Decision Support Systems 工程技术-计算机:人工智能
CiteScore
14.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
119
审稿时长
13 months
期刊介绍: The common thread of articles published in Decision Support Systems is their relevance to theoretical and technical issues in the support of enhanced decision making. The areas addressed may include foundations, functionality, interfaces, implementation, impacts, and evaluation of decision support systems (DSSs).
期刊最新文献
What happens when platforms disclose the purchase history associated with product reviews? A comparative analysis of the effect of initiative risk statement versus passive risk disclosure on the financing performance of Kickstarter campaigns DeepSecure: A computational design science approach for interpretable threat hunting in cybersecurity decision making Editorial Board Effects of visual-preview and information-sidedness features on website persuasiveness
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1