2015
DOI: 10.1109/tkde.2015.2405509
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mining Partially-Ordered Sequential Rules Common to Multiple Sequences

Abstract: Sequential rule mining is an important data mining problem with multiple applications. An important limitation of algorithms for mining sequential rules common to multiple sequences is that rules are very specific and therefore many similar rules may represent the same situation. This can cause three major problems: (1) similar rules can be rated quite differently, (2) rules may not be found because they are individually considered uninteresting, and (3) rules that are too specific are less likely to be used f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
38
0
2

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
(55 reference statements)
0
38
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…These rules are usually generated from sequential patterns or episodes (Febrer‐Hernández & Hernández‐Palancar, 2012; Fournier‐Viger, Lin, Kiran, Koh, & Thomas, 2017; Mooney & Roddick, 2013; Zimmermann, 2014) that appear in a single sequence (Mannila et al, 1997; Deogun & Jiang, 2005), across sequences (Lo, Ramalingam, Ranganath, & Vaswani, 2012; G. Das, Lin, Mannila, Renganathan, & Smyth, 1998), or common to multiple sequences (Lo et al, 2009; Fournier‐Viger, Wu, Tseng, Cao, & Nkambou, 2015). Classical algorithms are usually extended making use of a sliding‐window in which they find the frequent itemsets that will be used to generate the rules (Mannila et al, 1997; Fournier‐Viger, Wu, Tseng, & Nkambou, 2012).…”
Section: Considering Time As An Implied Component In the Mining Processmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These rules are usually generated from sequential patterns or episodes (Febrer‐Hernández & Hernández‐Palancar, 2012; Fournier‐Viger, Lin, Kiran, Koh, & Thomas, 2017; Mooney & Roddick, 2013; Zimmermann, 2014) that appear in a single sequence (Mannila et al, 1997; Deogun & Jiang, 2005), across sequences (Lo, Ramalingam, Ranganath, & Vaswani, 2012; G. Das, Lin, Mannila, Renganathan, & Smyth, 1998), or common to multiple sequences (Lo et al, 2009; Fournier‐Viger, Wu, Tseng, Cao, & Nkambou, 2015). Classical algorithms are usually extended making use of a sliding‐window in which they find the frequent itemsets that will be used to generate the rules (Mannila et al, 1997; Fournier‐Viger, Wu, Tseng, & Nkambou, 2012).…”
Section: Considering Time As An Implied Component In the Mining Processmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, notice that some of the most used algorithms are ARMADA (Winarko & Roddick, 2007), CMRules (Fournier‐Viger, Faghihi, et al, 2012), and TRuleGrowth (Fournier‐Viger et al, 2015). In addition, the algorithms CM‐SPADE (Fournier‐Viger, Gomariz, Campos, & Thomas, 2014) and SPAM (Ayres, Flannick, Gehrke, & Yiu, 2002) are also widely used to extract sequential patterns and then to generate temporal rules from them.…”
Section: Real‐world Applications and Available Software Toolsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main difference with association rule mining is the concept of time or sequence in sequences. A sequential rule X  Y can mean X followed by Y, while an association rule X  Y can mean that if X appears, then Y will also appear and can occur at one time [11].…”
Section: Sequential Rule Miningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Peeraer and Van Petegem [13] explained that province provides a warning on the additional impact of appropriate parameters at the teacher education level on ICT usage. Fournier-Viger et al [14] presented a rule growth approach to predict the performance of students in e-learning. Compared to normal sequential algorithms, the prediction accuracy of rule-growth algorithms is improved.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%