Decision Tree Construction Clause Samples

Decision Tree Construction. { } Decision tree constructing algorithms for data classification such as ID3 [86], C4.5 [87] and CART [14] are all loosely based on a common principle: divide- and-conquer [87]. The algorithms attempt to divide a training set T into multiple (disjoint) subsets so that each subset Ti belongs to a single target class. In the simplest form a training set consisting of N records is divided into N subsets T1,..., TN such that each subset is associated with a single record and target class. However, the predictive capabilities of such a classifier would be limited. Therefore decision tree construction algorithms like C4.5 try to build more general decision trees by limiting the number of partitions (and thereby limiting the size of the constructed decision tree). Since the problem of finding the smallest decision tree consistent with a specific training set is NP-complete [58], machine learning algorithms for constructing decision trees tend to be non-backtracking and greedy in nature. Although the non- backtracking and greedy nature of the algorithms has its advantages, such as resulting in relatively fast algorithms, they do depend heavily on the way the training set is divided into subsets. Algorithms like ID3 and C4.5 proceed in a recursive manner. First an attribute is selected for the root node and each of the branches to the child nodes corresponds with a possible value for this attribute. In this way the data set is split up into subsets according to the value of the attribute. This process is repeated recursively for each of the branches using only the records that occur in a certain branch. If all the records in a subset have the same target class the branch ends in a leaf node with the class prediction. If there are no attributes left to split a subset the branch ends in a leaf node predicting the class that occurs most frequent in the subset.

Related to Decision Tree Construction

  • Language Construction The language of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with its fair meaning and not for or against any party. The parties acknowledge that each party and its counsel have reviewed and had the opportunity to participate in the drafting of this Agreement and, accordingly, that the rule of construction that would resolve ambiguities in favor of non-drafting parties shall not apply to the interpretation of this Agreement.

  • Law; Construction This Agreement and any claim, counterclaim or dispute of any kind or nature whatsoever arising out of or in any way relating to this Agreement (“Claim”), directly or indirectly, shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the internal laws of the State of New York.

  • Contract Construction 6.27.1 The parties acknowledge that each party and its counsel have reviewed this CONTRACT and that the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in the interpretation of this CONTRACT or any amendment or exhibits hereto.

  • Neutral Construction Neither party hereto may rely on any drafts of this Agreement in any interpretation of the Agreement. Both parties to this Agreement have reviewed this Agreement and have participated in its drafting and, accordingly, neither party shall attempt to invoke the normal rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party in any interpretation of this Agreement.

  • General Construction 20.2.1. Binding Nature.............................................. 20.2.2. Entire Agreement............................................ 20.2.3. Governing Law............................................... 20.2.4. Indulgences Not Waivers..................................... 20.2.5. Titles Not to Affect Interpretation......................... 20.2.6.