The Selection of the Relevant Association Rules Using the Electre Method with Multiple Criteria

Azzeddine Dahbi, siham jabri, youssef balouki, Taoufiq Gadi

Abstract


The extraction of association rules is a very attractive data mining task and the most widespread in the business world and in modern society, trying to obtain the interesting relationship and connection between collections of articles, products or items in high transactional databases. The immense quantity of association rules obtained expresses the main obstacle that a decision maker can handle. Consequently, in order to establish the most interesting association rules, several interestingness measures have been introduced. Currently, there is no optimal measure that can be chosen to judge the selected association rules. To avoid this problem we suggest to apply ELECTRE method one of the multi-criteria decision making, taking into consideration a formal study of measures of interest according to structural properties, and intending to find a good compromise and select the most interesting association rules without eliminating any measures. Experiments conducted on reference data sets show a significant improvement in the performance of the proposed strategy

Keywords


Data Mining; Associatio Rules Mining; Interestingness Measures; MultiCriteria Decision Analysis; Electre Method; Structural Properties

References


R. Agrawal and R. Srikant, “Fast algorithms for mining association rules,” Proceeding VLDB ’94 Proc. 20th Int. Conf. Very Large Data Bases, vol. 1215, pp. 487–499, 1994.

A. Silberschatz and A. Tuzhilin, “What Makes Pattens Interesting in Knowledge Discovery Systems,” IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng., 1996 vol. 8, no. 6 (Dec), pp. 970–974, 1996.

H. X. Huynh, F. Guillet, T. Q. Le, and H. Briand, “Ranking objective interestingness measures with sensitivity values,” Distribution, vol. 24, pp. 122–132, 2008.

R. Gras, R. Couturier, J. Blanchard, H. Briand, P. Kuntz, and P. Petter, “Quelques critères pour une mesure de qualité de règles d’association,” in Mesures de Qualités pour la Fouille de Données RNTI-E-1, 2004, 2004th ed., p. 3_31.

M. Gavrilov, D. Anguelov, P. Indyk, and R. Motwani, “Mining The Stock Market: Which Measure Is Best ?,” Acm Sigkdd, pp. 487–496, 2000.

B. Vaillant, P. Lenca, and S. Lallich, “A clustering of interestingness measures,” Discov. Sci. Proc., vol. 3245, pp. 290–297, 2004.

M. C. Chen, “Ranking discovered rules from data mining with multiple criteria by data envelopment analysis,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 1110–1116, 2007.

M. Toloo, B. Sohrabi, and S. Nalchigar, “A new method for ranking discovered rules from data mining by DEA,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 8503–8508, 2009.

S. Bouker, R. Saidi, S. Ben Yahia, and E. Mephu Nguifo, “Mining Undominated Association Rules Through Interestingness Measures,” Int. J. Artif. Intell. Tools, vol. 23, no. 04, p. 1460011+, 2014.

A. Dahbi, Y. Ballouki, and T. Gadi, “A new method for selecting interesting association rules using genetic algorithm with multiple criteria,” ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences’ vol. 12, no. 19, pp. 5405–5412, 2017.

L. Cao, D. Luo, and C. Zhang, “Knowledge actionability: satisfying technical and business interestingness,” Int. J. Bus. Intell. Data Min., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 496–514, 2007.

B. Liu, W. Hsu, S. Chen, and Y. Ma, “Analyzing the subjective interestigness of association rules,” IEEE Intell. Syst., vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 47–55, 2000.

S. O. Rezende, E. A. Melanda, M. L. Fujimoto, R. A. Sinoara, and V. O. de Carvalho, “Combining data-driven and user-driven evaluation measures to identify interesting rules,” pp. 38–55, 2009.

R. Paul, T. Groza, J. Hunter, and A. Zankl, “Semantic interestingness measures for discovering association rules in the skeletal dysplasia domain.,” J. Biomed. Semantics, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 8, 2014.

L. Geng and H. J. Hamilton, “Interestingness measures for data mining,” ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 1–32, 2006.

P.-N. Tan, V. Kumar, and J. Srivastava, “Selecting the Right Interestingness Measure for Association Patterns,” Proc. eighth ACM SIGKDD Int. Conf. Knowl. Discov. Data Min. - KDD ’02, vol. 2, pp. 32–41, 2002.

M. Velasquez and P. T. Hester, “An Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods,” vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 56–66, 2013.

P. Place, D. Lattre, and P. Cedex, “Electre Methods _Manual Do Lansade.”

A. S. Milani, A. Shanian, and C. El-Lahham, “Using different ELECTRE methods in strategic planning in the presence of human behavioral resistance,” J. Appl. Math. Decis. Sci., vol. 2006, no. December 2005, pp. 1–19, 2006.

J. Wang, J. Han, and J. Pei, “Closet+: Searching for the best strategies for mining frequent closed itemsets,” Proc. ninth ACM SIGKDD Int. Conf. Knowl. Discov. data Min., pp. 236–245, 2003.

M. J. Zaki and C. Hsiao, “CHARM: An efficient algorithm for closed association rule mining,” 2nd SIAM Int. Conf. Data Min., pp. 457–473, 1999.




DOI: http://doi.org/10.11591/ijai.v9.i4.pp%25p
Total views : 128 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


View IJAI Stats

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.