Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 15165399

A classification paradigm for distributed vertically partitioned data.

Abstract

In general, pattern classification algorithms assume that all the features are available during the construction of a classifier and its subsequent use. In many practical situations, data are recorded in different servers that are geographically apart, and each server observes features of local interest. The underlying infrastructure and other logistics (such as access control) in many cases do not permit continual synchronization. Each server thus has a partial view of the data in the sense that feature subsets (not necessarily disjoint) are available at each server. In this article, we present a classification algorithm for this distributed vertically partitioned data. We assume that local classifiers can be constructed based on the local partial views of the data available at each server. These local classifiers can be any one of the many standard classifiers (e.g., neural networks, decision tree, k nearest neighbor). Often these local classifiers are constructed to support decision making at each location, and our focus is not on these individual local classifiers. Rather, our focus is constructing a classifier that can use these local classifiers to achieve an error rate that is as close as possible to that of a classifier having access to the entire feature set. We empirically demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed algorithm and also provide theoretical results quantifying the loss that results as compared to the situation where the entire feature set is available to any single classifier.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jayanta Basak, Ravi Kothari. 2004. A classification paradigm for distributed vertically partitioned data.. https://doi.org/10.1162/089976604323057470

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

A comparative evaluation of full-text, concept-based, and context-sensitive search.

OBJECTIVES: Study comparatively (1) concept-based search, using documents pre-indexed by a conceptual hierarchy; (2) context-sensitive search, using structured, labeled documents; and (3) traditional full-text search. Hypotheses were: (1) more contexts lead to better retrieval accuracy; and (2) adding concept-based search to the other searches would improve upon their baseline performances. DESIGN: Use our Vaidurya architecture, for search and retrieval evaluation, of structured documents classified by a conceptual hierarchy, on a clinical guidelines test collection. MEASUREMENTS: Precision computed at different levels of recall to assess the contribution of the retrieval methods. Comparisons of precisions done with recall set at 0.5, using t-tests. RESULTS: Performance increased monotonically with the number of query context elements. Adding context-sensitive elements, mean improvement was 11.1% at recall 0.5. With three contexts, mean query precision was 42% +/- 17% (95% confidence interval [CI], 31% to 53%); with two contexts, 32% +/- 13% (95% CI, 27% to 38%); and one context, 20% +/- 9% (95% CI, 15% to 24%). Adding context-based queries to full-text queries monotonically improved precision beyond the 0.4 level of recall. Mean improvement was 4.5% at recall 0.5. Adding concept-based search to full-text search improved precision to 19.4% at recall 0.5. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated usefulness of concept-based and context-sensitive queries for enhancing the precision of retrieval from a digital library of semi-structured clinical guideline documents. Concept-based searches outperformed free-text queries, especially when baseline precision was low. In general, the more ontological elements used in the query, the greater the resulting precision.

Abstracting and Indexing↗

Improvements to the Red List Index.

The Red List Index uses information from the IUCN Red List to track trends in the projected overall extinction risk of sets of species. It has been widely recognised as an important component of the suite of indicators needed to measure progress towards the international target of significantly reducing the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010. However, further application of the RLI (to non-avian taxa in particular) has revealed some shortcomings in the original formula and approach: It performs inappropriately when a value of zero is reached; RLI values are affected by the frequency of assessments; and newly evaluated species may introduce bias. Here we propose a revision to the formula, and recommend how it should be applied in order to overcome these shortcomings. Two additional advantages of the revisions are that assessment errors are not propagated through time, and the overall level extinction risk can be determined as well as trends in this over time.

Abstracting and Indexing↗