|
1 | 1 | % 1. Title: Nursery Database
|
2 |
| -% |
| 2 | +% |
3 | 3 | % 2. Sources:
|
4 | 4 | % (a) Creator: Vladislav Rajkovic et al. (13 experts)
|
5 | 5 | % (b) Donors: Marko Bohanec (marko.bohanec@ijs.si)
|
6 | 6 | % Blaz Zupan (blaz.zupan@ijs.si)
|
7 | 7 | % (c) Date: June, 1997
|
8 |
| -% |
| 8 | +% |
9 | 9 | % 3. Past Usage:
|
10 |
| -% |
| 10 | +% |
11 | 11 | % The hierarchical decision model, from which this dataset is
|
12 |
| -% derived, was first presented in |
13 |
| -% |
| 12 | +% derived, was first presented in |
| 13 | +% |
14 | 14 | % M. Olave, V. Rajkovic, M. Bohanec: An application for admission in
|
15 | 15 | % public school systems. In (I. Th. M. Snellen and W. B. H. J. van de
|
16 | 16 | % Donk and J.-P. Baquiast, editors) Expert Systems in Public
|
17 | 17 | % Administration, pages 145-160. Elsevier Science Publishers (North
|
18 | 18 | % Holland)}, 1989.
|
19 |
| -% |
| 19 | +% |
20 | 20 | % Within machine-learning, this dataset was used for the evaluation
|
21 | 21 | % of HINT (Hierarchy INduction Tool), which was proved to be able to
|
22 | 22 | % completely reconstruct the original hierarchical model. This,
|
23 | 23 | % together with a comparison with C4.5, is presented in
|
24 |
| -% |
| 24 | +% |
25 | 25 | % B. Zupan, M. Bohanec, I. Bratko, J. Demsar: Machine learning by
|
26 | 26 | % function decomposition. ICML-97, Nashville, TN. 1997 (to appear)
|
27 |
| -% |
| 27 | +% |
28 | 28 | % 4. Relevant Information Paragraph:
|
29 |
| -% |
| 29 | +% |
30 | 30 | % Nursery Database was derived from a hierarchical decision model
|
31 | 31 | % originally developed to rank applications for nursery schools. It
|
32 | 32 | % was used during several years in 1980's when there was excessive
|
|
38 | 38 | % The model was developed within expert system shell for decision
|
39 | 39 | % making DEX (M. Bohanec, V. Rajkovic: Expert system for decision
|
40 | 40 | % making. Sistemica 1(1), pp. 145-157, 1990.).
|
41 |
| -% |
| 41 | +% |
42 | 42 | % The hierarchical model ranks nursery-school applications according
|
43 | 43 | % to the following concept structure:
|
44 |
| -% |
| 44 | +% |
45 | 45 | % NURSERY Evaluation of applications for nursery schools
|
46 | 46 | % . EMPLOY Employment of parents and child's nursery
|
47 | 47 | % . . parents Parents' occupation
|
|
55 | 55 | % . SOC_HEALTH Social and health picture of the family
|
56 | 56 | % . . social Social conditions
|
57 | 57 | % . . health Health conditions
|
58 |
| -% |
| 58 | +% |
59 | 59 | % Input attributes are printed in lowercase. Besides the target
|
60 | 60 | % concept (NURSERY) the model includes four intermediate concepts:
|
61 | 61 | % EMPLOY, STRUCT_FINAN, STRUCTURE, SOC_HEALTH. Every concept is in
|
62 | 62 | % the original model related to its lower level descendants by a set
|
63 |
| -% of examples (for these examples sets see |
| 63 | +% of examples (for these examples sets see |
64 | 64 | % http://www-ai.ijs.si/BlazZupan/nursery.html).
|
65 |
| -% |
| 65 | +% |
66 | 66 | % The Nursery Database contains examples with the structural
|
67 | 67 | % information removed, i.e., directly relates NURSERY to the eight input
|
68 | 68 | % attributes: parents, has_nurs, form, children, housing, finance,
|
69 | 69 | % social, health.
|
70 |
| -% |
| 70 | +% |
71 | 71 | % Because of known underlying concept structure, this database may be
|
72 | 72 | % particularly useful for testing constructive induction and
|
73 | 73 | % structure discovery methods.
|
74 |
| -% |
| 74 | +% |
75 | 75 | % 5. Number of Instances: 12960
|
76 | 76 | % (instances completely cover the attribute space)
|
77 |
| -% |
| 77 | +% |
78 | 78 | % 6. Number of Attributes: 8
|
79 |
| -% |
| 79 | +% |
80 | 80 | % 7. Attribute Values:
|
81 |
| -% |
| 81 | +% |
82 | 82 | % parents usual, pretentious, great_pret
|
83 | 83 | % has_nurs proper, less_proper, improper, critical, very_crit
|
84 | 84 | % form complete, completed, incomplete, foster
|
|
87 | 87 | % finance convenient, inconv
|
88 | 88 | % social non-prob, slightly_prob, problematic
|
89 | 89 | % health recommended, priority, not_recom
|
90 |
| -% |
| 90 | +% |
91 | 91 | % 8. Missing Attribute Values: none
|
92 |
| -% |
| 92 | +% |
93 | 93 | % 9. Class Distribution (number of instances per class)
|
94 |
| -% |
| 94 | +% |
95 | 95 | % class N N[%]
|
96 | 96 | % ------------------------------
|
97 | 97 | % not_recom 4320 (33.333 %)
|
@@ -13078,4 +13078,3 @@ great_pret,very_crit,foster,more,critical,inconv,slightly_prob,not_recom,not_rec
|
13078 | 13078 | great_pret,very_crit,foster,more,critical,inconv,problematic,recommended,spec_prior
|
13079 | 13079 | great_pret,very_crit,foster,more,critical,inconv,problematic,priority,spec_prior
|
13080 | 13080 | great_pret,very_crit,foster,more,critical,inconv,problematic,not_recom,not_recom
|
13081 |
| - |
0 commit comments