Deriving insights from high-dimensional data is one of the core problems in data mining. The difficulty mainly stems from the fact that there are exponentially many variable combinations to potentially consider, and there are infinitely many if we consider weighted combinations, even for linear combinations. Hence, an obvious question is whether we can automate the search for interesting patterns and visualizations. In this paper, we consider the setting where a user wants to learn as efficiently as possible about real-valued attributes. For example, to understand the distribution of crime rates in different geographic areas in terms of other (numerical, ordinal and or categorical) variables that describe the areas. We introduce a method to find subgroups in the data that are maximally informative (in the formal Information Theoretic sense) with respect to a single or set of real-valued target attributes. The subgroup descriptions are in terms of a succinct set of arbitrarily-typed other attributes. The approach is based on the Subjective Interestingness framework FORSIED to enable the use of prior knowledge when finding most informative non-redundant patterns, and hence the method also supports iterative data mining.
We introduce a new kind of patterns, called emerging patterns (EPs), for knowledge discovery from databases. EPs are defined as itemsets whose supports increase significantly from one dataset to another. EPs can capture emerging trends in timestamped databases, or useful contrasts between data classes. EPs have been proven useful: we have used them to build very powerful classifiers, which are more accurate than C4.5 and CBA, for many datasets. We believe that EPs with low to medium support, such as 1 -20 , can give useful new insights and guidance to experts, in even “well understood” applications. The efficient mining of EPs is a challenging problem, since (i) the Apriori property no longer holds for EPs, and (ii) there are usually too many candidates for high dimensional databases or for small support thresholds such as 0.5 . Naive algorithms are too costly. To solve this problem, (a) we promote the description of large collections of itemsets using their concise borders (the pair of sets of the minimal and of the maximal itemsets in the collections). (b) We design EP mining algorithms which manipulate only borders of collections (especially using our multiborder-differential algorithm), and which represent discovered EPs using borders. All EPs satisfying a constraint can be efficiently discovered by our border-based algorithms, which take the borders, derived by Max-Miner, of large itemsets as inputs. In our experiments on large and high dimensional datasets including the US census and Mushroom datasets, many EPs, including some with large cardinality, are found quickly. We also give other algorithms for discovering general or special types of EPs. Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part ol‘this work Iht personal or classroom USC is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the lirst page. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists. requires prior specific permission and or a fee. KDD-99 San Diego CA USA Copyright ACM 1999 l-58113-143-7 99 08...$5.00 Jinyan Li Department of CSSE The University of Melbourne jyli@cs.mu.oz.au This paper gives a survey of contrast set mining (CSM), emerging pattern mining (EPM), and subgroup discovery (SD) in a unifying framework named supervised descriptive rule discovery. While all these research areas aim at discovering patterns in the form of rules induced from labeled data, they use different terminology and task definitions, claim to have different goals, claim to use different rule learning heuristics, and use different means for selecting subsets of induced patterns. This paper contributes a novel understanding of these subareas of data mining by presenting a unified terminology, by explaining the apparent differences between the learning tasks as variants of a unique supervised descriptive rule discovery task and by exploring the apparent differences between the approaches. It also shows that various rule learning heuristics used in CSM, EPM and SD algorithms all aim at optimizing a trade off between rule coverage and precision. The commonalities (and differences) between the approaches are showcased on a selection of best known variants of CSM, EPM and SD algorithms. The paper also provides a critical survey of existing supervised descriptive rule discovery visualization methods. A fundamental task in data analysis is understanding the differences between several contrasting groups. These groups can represent different classes of objects, such as male or female students, or the same group over time, e.g. freshman students in 1993 through 1998. We present the problem of mining contrast sets: conjunctions of attributes and values that differ meaningfully in their distribution across groups. We provide a search algorithm for mining contrast sets with pruning rules that drastically reduce the computational complexity. Once the contrast sets are found, we post-process the results to present a subset that are surprising to the user given what we have already shown. We explicitly control the probability of Type I error (false positives) and guarantee a maximum error rate for the entire analysis by using Bonferroni corrections.