Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1106492. 	[Title] Stochastically Guided Disjunctive Version Space Learning [Abstract] This paper presents an incremental concept learning approach to identiflcation of concepts with high overall accuracy. The main idea is to address the concept overlap as a central problem when learning multiple descriptions. Many traditional inductive algorithms, as those from the disjunctive version space family considered here, face this problem. The approach focuses on combinations of confldent, possibly overlapping, concepts with an original stochastic complexity formula. The focusing is e-cient because it is organized as a simulated annealing-based beam search. The experiments show that the approach is especially suitable for developing incremental learning algorithms with the following advantages: flrst, it generates highly accurate concepts; second, it overcomes to a certain degree the sensitivity to the order of examples; and third, it handles noisy examples. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #277263. 	[Title] Induction of decision trees and Bayesian classification applied to diagnosis of sport injuries [Abstract] Machine learning techniques can be used to extract knowledge from data stored in medical databases. In our application, various machine learning algorithms were used to extract diagnostic knowledge to support the diagnosis of sport injuries. The applied methods include variants of the Assistant algorithm for top-down induction of decision trees, and variants of the Bayesian classifier. The available dataset was insufficent for reliable diagnosis of all sport injuries considered by the system. Consequently, expert-defined diagnostic rules were added and used as pre-classifiers or as generators of additional training instances for injuries with few training examples. Experimental results show that the classification accuracy and the explanation capability of the naive Bayesian classifier with the fuzzy discretization of numerical attributes was superior to other methods and was estimated as the most appro priate for practical use. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3218. 	[Title] Rule Induction with CN2: Some Recent Improvements [Abstract] The CN2 algorithm induces an ordered list of classification rules from examples using entropy as its search heuristic. In this short paper, we describe two improvements to this algorithm. Firstly, we present the use of the Laplacian error estimate as an alternative evaluation function and secondly, we show how unordered as well as ordered rules can be generated. We experimentally demonstrate significantly improved performances resulting from these changes, thus enhancing the usefulness of CN2 as an inductive tool. Comparisons with Quinlan's C4.5 are also made. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1110426. 	[Title] Incremental Reduced Error Pruning [Abstract] This paper outlines some problems that may occur with Reduced Error Pruning in relational learning algorithms, most notably efficiency. Thereafter a new method, Incremental Reduced Error Pruning, is proposed that attempts to address all of these problems. Experiments show that in many noisy domains this method is much more efficient than alternative algorithms, along with a slight gain in accuracy. However, the experiments show as well that the use of the algorithm cannot be recommended for domains which require a very specific concept description. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6941. 	[Title] Multi-class problems and discretization in ICL Extended abstract [Abstract] Handling multi-class problems and real numbers is important in practical applications of machine learning to KDD problems. While attribute-value learners address these problems as a rule, very few ILP systems do so. The few ILP systems that handle real numbers mostly do so by trying out all real values that are applicable, thus running into efficiency or overfitting problems. This paper discusses some recent extensions of ICL that address these problems. ICL, which stands for Inductive Constraint Logic, is an ILP system that learns first order logic formulae from positive and negative examples. The main charateristic of ICL is its view on examples. These are seen as interpretations which are true or false for the clausal target theory (in CNF). We first argue that ICL can be used for learning a theory in a disjunctive normal form (DNF). With this in mind, a possible solution for handling more than two classes is given (based on some ideas from CN2). Finally, we show how to tackle problems with continuous values by adapting discretization techniques from attribute value learners. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1152290. 	[Title] Unsupervised Constructive Learning [Abstract] In constructive induction (CI), the learner's problem representation is modified as a normal part of the learning process. This is useful when the initial representation is inadequate or inappropriate. In this paper, I argue that the distinction between constructive and non-constructive methods is unclear. I propose a theoretical model which allows (a) a clean distinction to be made and (b) the process of CI to be properly motivated. I also show that although constructive induction has been used almost exclusively in the context of supervised learning, there is no reason why it cannot form a part of an unsupervised regime. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1120169. 	[Title] What do Constructive Learners Really Learn? [Abstract] In constructive induction (CI), the learner's problem representation is modified as a normal part of the learning process. This may be necessary if the initial representation is inadequate or inappropriate. However, the distinction between constructive and non-constructive methods appears to be highly ambiguous. Several conventional definitions of the process of constructive induction appear to include all conceivable learning processes. In this paper I argue that the process of constructive learning should be identified with that of relational learning (i.e., I suggest that Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #49843. 	[Title] Fossil: A Robust Relational Learner [Abstract] The research reported in this paper describes Fossil, an ILP system that uses a search heuristic based on statistical correlation. This algorithm implements a new method for learning useful concepts in the presence of noise. In contrast to Foil's stopping criterion, which allows theories to grow in complexity as the size of the training sets increases, we propose a new stopping criterion that is independent of the number of training examples. Instead, Fossil's stopping criterion depends on a search heuristic that estimates the utility of literals on a uniform scale. In addition we outline how this feature can be used for top-down pruning and present some preliminary results. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #84020. 	[Title] Classifiers: A Theoretical and Empirical Study [Abstract] This paper describes how a competitive tree learning algorithm can be derived from first principles. The algorithm approximates the Bayesian decision theoretic solution to the learning task. Comparative experiments with the algorithm and the several mature AI and statistical families of tree learning algorithms currently in use show the derived Bayesian algorithm is consistently as good or better, although sometimes at computational cost. Using the same strategy, we can design algorithms for many other supervised and model learning tasks given just a probabilistic representation for the kind of knowledge to be learned. As an illustration, a second learning algorithm is derived for learning Bayesian networks from data. Implications to incremental learning and the use of multiple models are also discussed. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #23738. 	[Title] A THEORY OF LEARNING CLASSIFICATION RULES [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #206524. 	[Title] Combining Data Mining and Machine Learning for Effective User Profiling [Abstract] This paper describes the automatic design of methods for detecting fraudulent behavior. Much of the design is accomplished using a series of machine learning methods. In particular, we combine data mining and constructive induction with more standard machine learning techniques to design methods for detecting fraudulent usage of cellular telephones based on profiling customer behavior. Specifically, we use a rule- learning program to uncover indicators of fraudulent behavior from a large database of cellular calls. These indicators are used to create profilers, which then serve as features to a system that combines evidence from multiple profilers to generate high-confidence alarms. Experiments indicate that this automatic approach performs nearly as well as the best hand-tuned methods for detecting fraud. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #11339. 	[Title] Exploring the Decision Forest: An Empirical Investigation of Occam's Razor in Decision Tree Induction [Abstract] We report on a series of experiments in which all decision trees consistent with the training data are constructed. These experiments were run to gain an understanding of the properties of the set of consistent decision trees and the factors that affect the accuracy of individual trees. In particular, we investigated the relationship between the size of a decision tree consistent with some training data and the accuracy of the tree on test data. The experiments were performed on a massively parallel Maspar computer. The results of the experiments on several artificial and two real world problems indicate that, for many of the problems investigated, smaller consistent decision trees are on average less accurate than the average accuracy of slightly larger trees. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #48075. 	[Title] Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery,  Adaptive Fraud Detection [Abstract] One method for detecting fraud is to check for suspicious changes in user behavior. This paper describes the automatic design of user profiling methods for the purpose of fraud detection, using a series of data mining techniques. Specifically, we use a rule-learning program to uncover indicators of fraudulent behavior from a large database of customer transactions. Then the indicators are used to create a set of monitors, which profile legitimate customer behavior and indicate anomalies. Finally, the outputs of the monitors are used as features in a system that learns to combine evidence to generate high-confidence alarms. The system has been applied to the problem of detecting cellular cloning fraud based on a database of call records. Experiments indicate that this automatic approach performs better than hand-crafted methods for detecting fraud. Furthermore, this approach can adapt to the changing conditions typical of fraud detection environments. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #187354. 	[Title] Applying ILP to Diterpene Structure Elucidation from 13 C NMR Spectra [Abstract] We present a novel application of ILP to the problem of diterpene structure elucidation from 13 C NMR spectra. Diterpenes are organic compounds of low molecular weight that are based on a skeleton of 20 carbon atoms. They are of significant chemical and commercial interest because of their use as lead compounds in the search for new pharmaceutical effectors. The structure elucidation of diterpenes based on 13 C NMR spectra is usually done manually by human experts with specialized background knowledge on peak patterns and chemical structures. In the process, each of the 20 skeletal atoms is assigned an atom number that corresponds to its proper place in the skeleton and the diterpene is classified into one of the possible skeleton types. We address the problem of learning classification rules from a database of peak patterns for diterpenes with known structure. Recently, propositional learning was successfully applied to learn classification rules from spectra with assigned atom numbers. As the assignment of atom numbers is a difficult process in itself (and possibly indistinguishable from the classification process), we apply ILP, i.e., relational learning, to the problem of classifying spectra without assigned atom numbers. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #66782. 	[Title] Using Qualitative Models to Guide Inductive Learning [Abstract] This paper presents a method for using qualitative models to guide inductive learning. Our objectives are to induce rules which are not only accurate but also explainable with respect to the qualitative model, and to reduce learning time by exploiting domain knowledge in the learning process. Such ex-plainability is essential both for practical application of inductive technology, and for integrating the results of learning back into an existing knowledge-base. We apply this method to two process control problems, a water tank network and an ore grinding process used in the mining industry. Surprisingly, in addition to achieving explainability the classificational accuracy of the induced rules is also increased. We show how the value of the qualitative models can be quantified in terms of their equivalence to additional training examples, and finally discuss possible extensions. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #27241. 	[Title] Error Reduction through Learning Multiple Descriptions [Abstract] Learning multiple descriptions for each class in the data has been shown to reduce generalization error but the amount of error reduction varies greatly from domain to domain. This paper presents a novel empirical analysis that helps to understand this variation. Our hypothesis is that the amount of error reduction is linked to the "degree to which the descriptions for a class make errors in a correlated manner." We present a precise and novel definition for this notion and use twenty-nine data sets to show that the amount of observed error reduction is negatively correlated with the degree to which the descriptions make errors in a correlated manner. We empirically show that it is possible to learn descriptions that make less correlated errors in domains in which many ties in the search evaluation measure (e.g. information gain) are experienced during learning. The paper also presents results that help to understand when and why multiple descriptions are a help (irrelevant attributes) and when they are not as much help (large amounts of class noise). Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1116268. 	[Title] The Sources of Increased Accuracy for Two Proposed Boosting Algorithms [Abstract] We introduce two boosting algorithms that aim to increase the generalization accuracy of a given classifier by incorporating it as a level-0 component in a stacked generalizer. Both algorithms construct a complementary level-0 classifier that can only generate coarse hypotheses for the training data. We show that the two algorithms boost generalization accuracy on a representative collection of data sets. The two algorithms are distinguished in that one of them modifies the class targets of selected training instances in order to train the complementary classifier. We show that the two algorithms achieve approximately equal generalization accuracy, but that they create complementary classifiers that display different degrees of accuracy and diversity. Our study provides evidence that it may be useful to investigate families of boosting algorithms that incorporate varying levels of accuracy and diversity, so as to achieve an appropriate mix for a given task and domain. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6639. 	[Title] Stochastic search in inductive concept learning [Abstract] Concept learning can be viewed as search of the space of concept descriptions. The hypothesis language determines the search space. In standard inductive learning algorithms, the structure of the search space is determined by generalization/specialization operators. Algorithms perform locally optimal search by using a hill-climbing and/or a beam-search strategy. To overcome this limitation, concept learning can be viewed as stochastic search of the space of concept descriptions. The proposed stochastic search method is based on simulated annealing which is known as a successful means for solving combinatorial optimization problems. The stochastic search method, implemented in a rule learning system ATRIS, is based on a compact and efficient representation of the problem and the appropriate operators for structuring the search space. Furthermore, by heuristic pruning of the search space, the method enables also handling of imperfect data. The paper introduces the stochastic search method, describes the ATRIS learning algorithm and gives results of the experiments. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1153264. 	[Title]  [Abstract] Design and Evaluation of the RISE 1.0 Learning System Pedro Domingos pedrod@ics.uci.edu Technical Report 94-34 August 30, 1994 Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #44017. 	[Title] Learning Decision Lists Using Homogeneous Rules [Abstract] A decision list is an ordered list of conjunctive rules (?). Inductive algorithms such as AQ and CN2 learn decision lists incrementally, one rule at a time. Such algorithms face the rule overlap problem | the classification accuracy of the decision list depends on the overlap between the learned rules. Thus, even though the rules are learned in isolation, they can only be evaluated in concert. Existing algorithms solve this problem by adopting a greedy, iterative structure. Once a rule is learned, the training examples that match the rule are removed from the training set. We propose a novel solution to the problem: composing decision lists from homogeneous rules, rules whose classification accuracy does not change with their position in the decision list. We prove that the problem of finding a maximally accurate decision list can be reduced to the problem of finding maximally accurate homogeneous rules. We report on the performance of our algorithm on data sets from the UCI repository and on the MONK's problems. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6767. 	[Title] Generalizing from Case Studies: A Case Study [Abstract] Most empirical evaluations of machine learning algorithms are case studies evaluations of multiple algorithms on multiple databases. Authors of case studies implicitly or explicitly hypothesize that the pattern of their results, which often suggests that one algorithm performs significantly better than others, is not limited to the small number of databases investigated, but instead holds for some general class of learning problems. However, these hypotheses are rarely supported with additional evidence, which leaves them suspect. This paper describes an empirical method for generalizing results from case studies and an example application. This method yields rules describing when some algorithms significantly outperform others on some dependent measures. Advantages for generalizing from case studies and limitations of this particular approach are also described. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1119987. 	[Title] Case-Based Sonogram Classification [Abstract] This report replicates and extends results reported by Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWC) personnel on the automatic classification of sonar images. They used novel case-based reasoning systems in their empirical studies, but did not obtain comparative analyses using standard classification algorithms. Therefore, the quality of the NAWC results were unknown. We replicated the NAWC studies and also tested several other classifiers (i.e., both case-based and otherwise) from the machine learning literature. These comparisons and their ramifications are detailed in this paper. Next, we investigated Fala and Walker's two suggestions for future work (i.e., on combining their similarity functions and on an alternative case representation). Finally, we describe several ways to incorporate additional domain-specific knowledge when applying case-based classifiers to similar tasks. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #417017. 	[Title] Relating Relational Learning Algorithms [Abstract] Relational learning algorithms are of special interest to members of the machine learning community; they offer practical methods for extending the representations used in algorithms that solve supervised learning tasks. Five approaches are currently being explored to address issues involved with using relational representations. This paper surveys algorithms embodying these approaches, summarizes their empirical evaluations, highlights their commonalities, and suggests potential directions for future research. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1106298. 	[Title] Is Consistency Harmful? [Abstract] We examine the issue of consistency from a new perspective. To avoid overfitting the training data, a considerable number of current systems have sacrificed the goal of learning hypotheses that are perfectly consistent with the training instances by setting a new goal of hypothesis simplicity (Occam's razor). Instead of using simplicity as a goal, we have developed a novel approach that addresses consistency directly. In other words, our concept learner has the explicit goal of selecting the most appropriate degree of consistency with the training data. We begin this paper by exploring concept learning with less than perfect consistency. Next, we describe a system that can adapt its degree of consistency in response to feedback about predictive accuracy on test data. Finally, we present the results of initial experiments that begin to address the question of how tightly hypotheses should fit the training data for different problems. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #35070. 	[Title] The RISE System: Conquering Without Separating [Abstract] Current rule induction systems (e.g. CN2) typically rely on a "separate and conquer" strategy, learning each rule only from still-uncovered examples. This results in a dwindling number of examples being available for learning successive rules, adversely affecting the system's accuracy. An alternative is to learn all rules simultaneously, using the entire training set for each. This approach is implemented in the Rise 1.0 system. Empirical comparison of Rise with CN2 suggests that "conquering without separating" performs similarly to its counterpart in simple domains, but achieves increasingly substantial gains in accuracy as the domain difficulty grows. Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #1106492 has the title `Stochastically Guided Disjunctive Version Space Learning  
` and the abstract `This paper presents an incremental concept learning approach to identiflcation of concepts with high overall accuracy. The main idea is to address the concept overlap as a central problem when learning multiple descriptions. Many traditional inductive algorithms, as those from the disjunctive version space family considered here, face this problem. The approach focuses on combinations of confldent, possibly overlapping, concepts with an original stochastic complexity formula. The focusing is e-cient because it is organized as a simulated annealing-based beam search. The experiments show that the approach is especially suitable for developing incremental learning algorithms with the following advantages: flrst, it generates highly accurate concepts; second, it overcomes to a certain degree the sensitivity to the order of examples; and third, it handles noisy examples. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #1106492 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #1106492 has the title `Stochastically Guided Disjunctive Version Space Learning  
` and the abstract `This paper presents an incremental concept learning approach to identiflcation of concepts with high overall accuracy. The main idea is to address the concept overlap as a central problem when learning multiple descriptions. Many traditional inductive algorithms, as those from the disjunctive version space family considered here, face this problem. The approach focuses on combinations of confldent, possibly overlapping, concepts with an original stochastic complexity formula. The focusing is e-cient because it is organized as a simulated annealing-based beam search. The experiments show that the approach is especially suitable for developing incremental learning algorithms with the following advantages: flrst, it generates highly accurate concepts; second, it overcomes to a certain degree the sensitivity to the order of examples; and third, it handles noisy examples. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #1106492 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].

This paper should be classified into: Rule_Learning