Information Extraction, Data Integration, and Uncertain Data Management: The State of The Art

Information Extraction, data Integration, and uncertain data management are different areas of research that got vast focus in the last two decades. Many researches tackled those areas of research individually. However, information extraction systems should have integrated with data integration methods to make use of the extracted information. Handling uncertainty in extraction and integration process is an important issue to enhance the quality of the data in such integrated systems. This article presents the state of the art of the mentioned areas of research and shows the common grounds and how to integrate information extraction and data integration under uncertainty management cover

Priority-Based Conflict Resolution in Inconsistent Relational Databases

We study here the impact of priorities on conflict resolution in inconsistent relational databases. We extend the framework of repairs and consistent query answers. We propose a set of postulates that an extended framework should satisfy and consider two instantiations of the framework: (locally preferred) l-repairs and (globally preferred) g-repairs. We study the relationships between them and the impact each notion of repair has on the computational complexity of repair checking and consistent query answers

An Improved Apriori Algorithm Based on an Evolution-Communication Tissue-Like P System with Promoters and Inhibitors

Apriori algorithm, as a typical frequent itemsets mining method, can help researchers and practitioners discover implicit associations from large amounts of data. In this work, a fast Apriori algorithm, called ECTPPI-Apriori, for processing large datasets, is proposed, which is based on an evolution-communication tissue-like P system with promoters and inhibitors. The structure of the ECTPPI-Apriori algorithm is tissue-like and the evolution rules of the algorithm are object rewriting rules. The time complexity of ECTPPI-Apriori is substantially improved from that of the conventional Apriori algorithms. The results give some hints to improve conventional algorithms by using membrane computing models

Methods of conceptual clustering and their relation to numerical taxonomy

Artificial Intelligence (AI) methods for machine learning can be viewed as forms of exploratory data analysis, even though they differ markedly from the statistical methods generally connoted by the term. The distinction between methods of machine learning and statistical data analysis is primarily due to differences in the way techniques of each type represent data and structure within data. That is, methods of machine learning are strongly biased toward symbolic (as opposed to numeric) data representations. We explore this difference within a limited context, devoting the bulk of our paper to the explication of conceptual clustering, an extension to the statistically based methods of numerical taxonomy. In conceptual clustering the formation of object clusters is dependent on the quality of 'higher-level' characterizations, termed concepts, of the clusters. The form of concepts used by existing conceptual clustering systems (sets of necessary and sufficient conditions) is described in some detail. This is followed by descriptions of several conceptual clustering techniques, along with sample output. We conclude with a discussion of how alternative concept representations might enhance the effectiveness of future conceptual clustering systems

On Cognitive Preferences and the Plausibility of Rule-based Models

It is conventional wisdom in machine learning and data mining that logical models such as rule sets are more interpretable than other models, and that among such rule-based models, simpler models are more interpretable than more complex ones. In this position paper, we question this latter assumption by focusing on one particular aspect of interpretability, namely the plausibility of models. Roughly speaking, we equate the plausibility of a model with the likeliness that a user accepts it as an explanation for a prediction. In particular, we argue that, all other things being equal, longer explanations may be more convincing than shorter ones, and that the predominant bias for shorter models, which is typically necessary for learning powerful discriminative models, may not be suitable when it comes to user acceptance of the learned models. To that end, we first recapitulate evidence for and against this postulate, and then report the results of an evaluation in a crowd-sourcing study based on about 3.000 judgments. The results do not reveal a strong preference for simple rules, whereas we can observe a weak preference for longer rules in some domains. We then relate these results to well-known cognitive biases such as the conjunction fallacy, the representative heuristic, or the recogition heuristic, and investigate their relation to rule length and plausibility.Comment: V4: Another rewrite of section on interpretability to clarify focus on plausibility and relation to interpretability, comprehensibility, and justifiabilit