Personalized privacy protection in social networks
Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment
Diversified ranking on large graphs: an optimization viewpoint
Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining
Multivariate prediction for learning on the semantic web
ILP'10 Proceedings of the 20th international conference on Inductive logic programming
Collective classification using heterogeneous classifiers
MLDM'11 Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Machine learning and data mining in pattern recognition
Competence region modelling in relational classification
ACIIDS'13 Proceedings of the 5th Asian conference on Intelligent Information and Database Systems - Volume Part II
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Recently a number of modeling techniques have been developed for data mining and machine learning in relational and network domains where the instances are not independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.). These methods specifically exploit the statistical dependencies among instances in order to improve classification accuracy. However, there has been little focus on how these same dependencies affect our ability to draw accurate conclusions about the performance of the models. More specifically, the complex link structure and attribute dependencies in network data violate the assumptions of many conventional statistical tests and make it difficult to use these tests to assess the models in an unbiased manner. In this work, we examine the task of within-network classification and the question of whether two algorithms will learn models which will result in significantly different levels of performance. We show that the commonly-used form of evaluation (paired t-test on overlapping network samples) can result in an unacceptable level of Type I error. Furthermore we show that Type I error increases as (1) the correlation among instances increases and (2) the size of the evaluation set increases (i.e., the proportion of labeled nodes in the network decreases). We propose a method for network cross-validation that combined with paired t-tests produces more acceptable levels of Type I error while still providing reasonable levels of statistical power (i.e., Type II error).