-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
/
query_answer.txt
145 lines (111 loc) · 9.83 KB
/
query_answer.txt
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
Highlights
"Our model generates longer association rule than MASP"
There is about a single longer association rule or more?
> Our model generates longer association rules than MASP
Abstract
"The state-of-the-art approach MASP is dependent on the order of items in the transaction."
It is proposed for solving of some kind of problem? There is proposed in a paper?
> Order dependency is the drawback of the MASP approach. OOIMASP is order independent.
"The results show that our proposed approach outperforms the MASP in both the comparison metrics i.e., the number of association rules generated and the length of the longest association rule."
Give some additional details, without extending to much the abstract. It is always better to have more rules?
> More association rules means more information is extracted from the transaction dataset. So more rules are better.
"….length of the longest association rule".
It is not very clear what you want to say. OOIMASP generates an association rule that is longer than all association rules generated by the MASP. A single association rule is a so much influencing factor? What you want to say represent an advantage?
> length of the longest association rule(s)
> there can be many association rules of maximum length
"We propose OOIMASP, which has two novel properties…"
What is OOIMASP? It is an algorithm? It is proposed for association rule mining?
> We propose OOIMASP algorithm, which has two novel properties...
"But, the proposed method..." -> Recommended the reformulation, do not begin with "But". In the sentence formulation you can use the word "disadvantage".
> The disadvantage of the proposed algorithm is that is requires more computational resources in terms of time.......
"But we claim that...." -> Recommended the reformulation, do not begin with "But".
> We claim that the extra information extracted using our method ......
"The proposed method produces multiple trees which can be very useful in the visual analysis of data."
This is helpful? How it can help ?
> Multiple trees will be generated depending upon distinct origins of items in the transaction dataset.
> User can see the effect of taking origin into account by comparing trees obtained using OOIMASP algorithm with the tree
> obtained using OIMASP algorithm.
Page 2
"Figure 1: Differnt MASP trees for the same dataset" -> "Different"
Page 3
"to together"
Page 4 - second sentence
"It gave satisfactory results when compared to then existing classification algorithms." -> Do you want to mean classification algorithms until 2006? Please explain more clearly the significance of "satisfactory results".
> It gave satisfactory results in terms of accuracy when compared to CBA, C4.5, NN and SVM.
> [https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6ccb/37c32a240666d0e6d4a24f33a35a5c6f3c9b.pdf]
"The quality of association rules depends on the threshold value of support and confidence."
What is the significance of "quality"?
> Quality means how much useful association rules are!
"Kuo et al. (2011) proposed an approach to find the best threshold values which can produce quality rules. It gave promising results when compared to the genetic algorithm."
"promising results" -> You should explain more clearly.
> Apriori algorithm has a very critical drawback - the minimal support and confidence are determined subjectively.
> The proposed algorithm suggests suitable threshold values and obtain quality rules.
> A real-world stock market database is employed to mine association rules to measure investment behavior and stock category > purchasing.
> Promising results: the proposed algorithm gave similar results compared to Apriori. But we don't need to provide threshold
> support and threshold confidence as we do in Apriori.
[https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1857703]
Page 4
"In the first phase of Apriori Agrawal & Srikant (1994) algorithm, all the itemsets are generated, and infrequent itemsets are pruned." -> "Apriori Agrawal & Srikant" is the name of the algorithm?
"The modified algorithm Abaya (2012) reduces the burden of pruning step, since it generates fewer candidate itemsets." -> Abaya - is the name of the algorithm?
You should search for other similar mistakes there are many more.
"The modified algorithm Abaya (2012) reduces…."
It is a modification of the "Apriori" algorithm mentioned in the previous sentence?
> Yes modification is done to apriori.
"In Maragatham & Lakshmi (2015), authors have proposed an efficient algorithm which combines both utility and temporal time periods for mining extraordinary association rules."
The sentence should be reformulated. Also explain the significance "extraordinary association rules". Why the rules are called extraordinary?
> The proposed work is extended from traditional ARM by incorporating the temporal and utility factor for mining significant > association rules.
> The experimentation is carried out on publication database and the experimental results proved that the proposed algorithm
> effectively discovers the utility-oriented temporal association rules.
Page 5
"Iff"
Second column of page 5.
"In this section, we have proposed an algorithm(OIMASP Algorithm 1)[modified version of MASP algorithm proposed in Soysal (2015)] which is independent of the ordering of items in transactions." -> Revise the sentence in order to be more ease to understand by the reader. It can be decomposed even in two sentences.
> In this section, we have proposed an OIMASP(Order Independent MASP) algorithm. The OIMASP algorithm is independent of the
> ordering of items in transactions.
Page 8
Algorithm 1
- Do not underline "function OIMASP" (same observation in case of other algorithms).
- The explanations from the beginning of the Algorithm 1 should be removed. They can be included as comments in the algorithm.
Page 8
"4.4. Modified version of OIMASP(OOIMASP) which takes into account origins of items in the transaction database" -> The title must be shortened and revised but should remain expressive to the content. For example, what is the significance of "OIMASP(OOIMASP)"
> OOIMASP(Origin based association rule mining with Order Independent MASP) algorithm
Page 10
"Discussion: ….." ->Should be included as a new paragraph.
Section 5. Experimental setup and results
"compared on five synthetic datasets" -> You should give some additional details about them.
"on three public datasets- chess, connect and mushroom" -> You should give some additional details about them. If they are used in some studies you should outline this aspect. You can indicate at leas one such a study in that are used these datasets for association rule mining.
[http://www.cs.cornell.edu/johannes/papers/2001/icde2001-mafia.pdf]
> The paper proposed a novel algorithm for mining maximal frequent itemsets from a transactional database.
> In the experimental analysis of the algorithm on real dataset[Connect, Mushroom, Chess] the proposed algorithm outperforms > previous works by a factor of three to five.
"We claim that the amount of information obtained from the dataset has compensated the
increase in time complexity of OOIMASP. OOIMASP takes approximately 5 times more
computing resources than MASP w.r.t the given datasets."
Explain more clearly. You can give some examples of scenarios and applications when the so much increased time does not present an impediment.
> For the dataset E and threshold support = .01 and threshold confidence = .30, number of rules generated by OOIMASP is
> 1690 whereas MASP generates no rules. So yes there is an increase in computational resources, but we are able to extract
> lot of hidden information out of the transactional database.
Please revise the conclusions carefully. I recommended reading the conclusion section of some papers published in the journal Expert Systems with Applications in order to better formulate this section.
Conclusions
"In this paper, we have proposed OOIMASP algorithm, which is order independent."
Which kind of algorithm?
"OOIMASP" -> From where this abbreviation came?
> In this paper, we have proposed OOIMASP algorithm (used for Association Rule Mining), which is order independent.
> MASP = Mostly Associated Sequential Patterns
> OIMASP = Order Independent MASP
> OOIMASP = Origin + OIMASP
"Unlike MASP...." -> What is MASP? Where is proposed (it is proposed in a paper)? "MASP" -> From where this abbreviation came?
> MASP = Mostly Associated Sequential Patterns [explained in O M Soysal Paper]
> Unlike MASP algorithm.....
"OOIMASP uses an intelligent frequency based approach to rearrange the items in transactions."
Please justify the use of the notion "intelligent".
"Our experimental results confirm that OOIMASP outperforms MASP in terms of both the metrics i.e., number of generated rules and the length of the longest rule."
You should extend this idea with some additional sentences related to the "number of generated rules" and "length of the longest rule" (see the observation from the abstract). It should be extended more than will appear in the abstract.
> Our experimental results confirm that OOIMASP outperforms MASP in terms of both the metrics i.e., number of generated
> rules and the length of the longest rule. On an average OOIMASP algorithm generates 632% longer rules and 457% more
> association rules than MASP algorithm. As per the Figure 13 there are cases where MASP algorithm is not able to produce
> even a single rule where as OOIMASP algorithm is generating large number of rules.
If there is any disadvantage should be mentioned here.
> OOIMASP algorithm requires approximately 5 times more computational resources than MASP algorithm.
"As a future work, we would like to parallelize OOIMASP algorithm in a cost optimal manner." -> Which kind of cost? This is intended to eliminate just the disadvantage of increased time?
> Objective is to eliminate the increase in computational resources used.
You must revise the paper carefully.