Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
These are general notional tutorial slides on data mining theory and practice from which content may be freely drawn. Monte F. Hancock, Jr. Chief Scientist Celestech, Inc. Data Mining is the detection, characterization, and exploitation of actionable patterns in data. Data Mining (DM) • Data Mining (DM) is the principled detection, characterization, and exploitation of actionable patterns in data. • It is performed by applying modern mathematical techniques to collected data in accordance with the scientific method. • DM uses a combination of empirical and theoretical principles to Connect Structure to Meaning by: – Selecting and conditioning relevant data – Identifying, characterizing, and classifying latent patterns – Presenting useful representations and interpretations to users • DM attempts to answer these questions: – – – – What patterns are in the information? What are the characteristics of these patterns? Can “meaning” be ascribed to these patterns and/or their changes? Can these patterns be presented to users in a way that will facilitate their assessment, understanding, and exploitation? – Can a machine learn these patterns and their relevant interpretations? DM for Decision Support ● “Decision Support” is all about… – – – – – – – – – – ● enabling users to group information in familiar ways controlling complexity by layering results (e.g., drill-down) supporting user’s changing priorities allowing intuition to be triggered (“I’ve seen this before!”) preserving and automating perishable institutional knowledge providing objective, repeatable metrics (e.g., confidence factors) fusing & simplifying results automating alerts on important results (“It’s happening again!”) detecting emerging behaviors before they consummate (“Look!”) delivering value (timely-relevant-accurate results) …helping users make the best choices. DM Provides “Intelligent” Analytic Functions ● Automating pattern detection – to characterize complex, distributed signatures that are worth human attention… and recognize those that are not. ● Associating events – that “go together” but are difficult for humans to correlate. ● Characterizing interesting processes – not just facts or simple events ● Detecting actionable anomalies – and explaining what makes them “different AND interesting”. ● Describing contexts – from multiple perspectives –with numbers, text and graphics DM Answers Questions Users are Asking ● Fusion Level 1: Who/What is Where/When in my space? – ● Fusion Level 2: What does it mean? – ● Enterprise relevance? What action should be taken? Fusion Level 4: What can I do better next time? – ● Has this been seen before? What will happen next? Fusion Level 3: Do I care? – ● Organize and present facts in domain context Adaptation by pattern updates and retraining How certain am I? – Quantitative assessment of evidentiary pedigree Useful Data Applications ● Accurate identification and classification– add value to raw data by tagging and annotation (e.g., fraud detection) ● Anomaly / normalcy and fusion – characterize, quantify, and assess ● Emerging patterns and evidence evaluation - capturing ● Behavior association - detection of actions that are distributed in time & ● Signature detection and association – detection & characterization “normalcy” of patterns and trends (e.g., network intrusion detection) institutional knowledge of how “events” arise and alerting when they emerge space but “synchronized” by a common objective: “connecting the dots” of multivariate signals, symbols, and emissions (e.g., voice recognition) ● Concept tagging - reasoning about abstract relationships to tag and annotate media of all types (e.g., automated web bots) ● Software agents assisting analysts – small-footprint “fire-andforget” apps that facilitate search, collaboration, etc. Some “Good” Data Mining Analytic Applications • Help the user focus via unobtrusive automation – – – • Automate aspects of classification and detection – – – – – • Determine which sets of data hold the most information for a task Support construction of ad hoc “on-the-fly” classifiers Provide automated constructs for merging decision engines (multi-level fusion) Detect and characterize “domain drift” (the “rules of the game” are changing) Provide functionality to make best estimate of “missing data” Extract/characterize/employ knowledge – – – – • Off-load burdensome labor (perform intelligent searches, smart winnowing) Post “smart” triggers/tripwires to data stream (e.g., anomaly detection) Help with mission triage (“Sort my in-basket!”) Rule induction from data, develop “signatures” from data Implement reasoning for decision support High-dimensional visualization Embed “decision explanation” capability into analytic applications Capture/automate/institutionalize best practice – – – – Make proven analytic processes available to all Capture rare, perishable human knowledge… and put it everywhere Generate “signature-ready” prose reports Capture and characterize the analytic process to anticipate user needs Things that make “hard” problems VERY hard – Events of interest occur relatively infrequently in very large datasets (“population imbalance”) – Information is distributed in a complex way across many features (the “feature selection problem”) – Collection is hard to task, data are difficult to prepare for analysis, and are never “perfect” (“noise” in the data, data gaps, coverage gaps) – Target patterns are ambiguous/unknown; “squelch” settings are brittle (e.g., hard to balance detection vs. “false-alarm” rates) – Target patterns change/morph over time and across operational modes (“domain drift”, processing methods becomes “stale”) Some Key Principles of “Information Driven” Data Mining 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Right People, Methods, Tools (in that order) Make no prior assumptions about the problem (“agnostic”) Begin with general techniques that let the data determine the direction of the analysis (“Funnel Method”) Don’t jump to conclusions; perform process audits as needed Don’t be a “one widget wonder”; integrate multiple paradigms so the strengths of one compensate for the weaknesses of another Break the problem into the right pieces (“Divide and Conquer”) Work the data, not the tools, but automate when possible Be systematic, consistent, thorough; don’t lose the forest for the trees. Document the work so that it is reproducible Collaborate to avoid surprises: team members, experts, customer Focus on the Goal: maximum value to the user within cost and schedule Select Appropriate Machine Reasoners 1.) Classifiers Classifiers ingest a list of attributes, and determine into which of finitely many categories the entity exhibiting these attributes falls. Automatic object recognition and next-event prediction are examples of this type of reasoning. 2.) Estimators Estimators ingest a list of attributes, and assign some numeric value to the entity exhibiting these attributes. The estimation of a probability or a "risk score" are examples of this type of reasoning. 3.) Semantic Mappers Semantic mappers ingest text (structured, unstructured, or both), and generate a data structure that gives the "meaning" of the text. Automatic gisting of documents is an example of this type of reasoning Semantic mapping generally requires some kind of domain model. 4.) Planners Planners ingest a scenario description, and formulate an efficient sequence of feasible actions that will move the domain to the specified goal state. 5.) Associators Associators sample the entire corpus of domain data, and identify relationships among entities. Automatic clustering of data to identify coherent subpopulations is a simple example. A more sophisticated example is the forensic analysis of phone, flight, and financial records to infer the structure of terrorist networks. Embedded Knowledge… • • • • • • • • • Principled, domain-savvy synthesis of “circumstantial” evidence Copes well with ambiguous, incomplete, or incorrect input Enables justification of results in terms domain experts use Facilitates good pedagogical helps “Solves the problem like the man does”, and so is comprehensible to most domain experts. Degrades linearly in combinatorial domains Can grow in power with “experience” Preserves perishable expertise Allows efficient incremental upgrade/adjustment/repurposing Features • A feature is the value assumed by some attribute of an entity in the domain (e.g., size, quality, age, color, etc.) • Features can be numbers, symbols, or complex data objects • Features are usually reduced to some simple form before modeling is performed. >>>features are usually single numeric values or contiguous strings.<<< Feature Space • Once the features have been designated, a feature space can be defined for a domain by placing the features into an ordered array in a systematic way. • Each instance of an entity having the given features is then represented by a single point in n-dimensional Euclidean space: its feature vector. • This Euclidean space, or feature space for the domain, has dimension equal to the number of features. • Feature spaces can be one-dimensional, infinite-dimensional, or anywhere in between. How do classifiers work? Machines • Data mining paradigms are characterized by – A “concept of operation (CONOP: component structure, I/O, training alg., operation) – An architecture (component type, #, arrangement, semantics) – A set of parameters (weights/coefficients/vigilance parameters) >>>it is assumed here that parameters are real numbers.<<< A machine is an instantiation of a data mining paradigm. • Examples of parameter sets for various paradigms – – – – Neural Networks: interconnect weights Belief Networks: conditional probability tables Kernel-Based-classifiers (SVM, RBF): regression coefficients Metric classifiers (K-means): cluster centroids A Spiral Methodology for the Data Mining Process The DM Discovery Phase: Descriptive Modeling • • • • • OLAP Visualization Unsupervised learning Link Analysis/Collaborative Filtering Rule Induction The DM Exploitation Phase: Predictive Modeling • • • • • • • Paradigm selection Test design Formulation of meta-schemes Model construction Model evaluation Model deployment Model maintenance A “de facto” standard DM Methodology CRISP-DM (“cross-industry standard process for data mining”) – – – – – – 1.) Business Understanding 2.) Data Understanding 3.) Data Preparation 4.) Modeling 5.) Evaluation 6.) Deployment Data Mining Paradigms: What does your solution look like? • Conventional Decision Models -statistical inference, logistic regression, score cards • Heuristic Models -human expert, knowledge-based expert systems, fuzzy logic, decision trees, belief nets • Regression Models -neural networks (all sorts), radial basis functions, adaptive logic networks, decision trees, SVM Real-World DM Business Challenges • Complex and conflicting goals – Defining “success” – Getting “buy in” • Enterprise data is distributed • Limited automation • Unrealistic expectations Real-World DM Technical Challenges • • • • • • big data consume space and time efficiency vs. comprehensibility combinatorial explosion diluted information difficult to develop “intuition” algorithm roulette Data Mining Problems: What does your domain look like? • • • • • • How well is the problem understood? How "big" is the problem? What kind of data do we have? What question are we answering? How deeply buried in the data is the answer? How must the answer be presented to the user? 1. Business Understanding How well is the problem understood? How well is the problem understood? •Domain intuition: low/medium/high –Experts available? –Good documentation? –DM team’s prior experience? –Prior art? •What is the enterprise definition of “success”? •What is the target environment? •How skillful are the users? •Where are the pitchforks? 2. Data Understanding 3. Preparing the Data How "big" is the problem? What kind of data do we have? DM Aspects of Data Preparation • • • • • • • Data Selection Data Cleansing Data Representation Feature Extraction and Transformation Feature Enhancement Data Division Configuration Management How "big" is the problem? •Number of exemplars (“rows”) •Number of features (“columns”) •Number of classes (“ground truth”) •Cost/schedule/talent (dollars, days, dudes) •Tools (own/make/buy, familiarity, scope) What kind of data do we have? •Feature type: nominal/numeric/complex •Feature mix: homo/heterogeneous by type •Feature tempo: –Fresh/stale –Periodic/sporadic –Synchronous/asynchronous •Feature data quality: –Low/high SNR –Few/many gaps –Easy/hard to access –Objective/subjective •Feature information quality –Salience, correlation, localization, conditioning –Comprehensive? Representative? How much data do I need? • Many heuristics – Monte’s 6MN rule, other similar – Support vectors • Segmentation requirements • Comprehensive • Representative – Consider population imbalance Feature Saliency Tests • • • • • • Correlation/Independence Visualization to determine saliency Autoclustering to test for homogeneity KL-Principal Component Analysis Statistical Normalization (e.g., ZSCORE) Outliers, Gaps Making Feature Sets for Data Mining • Converting Nominal Data to Numeric: Numeric Coding • Converting Numeric data to Nominal: Symbolic Coding • Creating Ground-Truth Information can be Irretrievably Distributed (e.g., the parity-N problem) 0010100110… 1 The best feature set is not necessarily the set of best features. An example of a Feature Metric “Salience” : geometric mean of class precisions • an objective measure of the ability of a feature to distinguish classes • takes class proportion into account • specific to a particular classifier and problem • does not measure independence Nominal to Numeric Coding... …one step at a time! Original Data: Nam e Bill Bubbles Rover Ringo Chuck Tweety Clas s primates fishes domestic bugs bacteria birds Feature 1 Feature 2 Feature 3 Feature 4 Feature 5 (habitat) (diet) (integument) (morphology) (life cycle) land sea land land parasitic land omnivore omnivore carnivore herbivore other omnivore skin w/o feathers biped no wings live birth scales no wings, non biped eggs w/o meta skin w/o feathers no wings, non biped live birth exoskeleton wings, non-biped egss w. meta other no wings, non biped other skin with feathers wings, biped eggs w/o meta Step 1: Nam e Bill Bubbles Rover Ringo Chuck Tweety Clas s mammals non-mammals mammals non-mammals non-mammals non-mammals Feature 1 Feature 2 Feature 3 Feature 4 Feature 5 (habitat) (diet) (integument) (morphology) (life cycle) land sea land land parasitic land omnivore omnivore carnivore herbivore other omnivore skin w/o feathers scales skin w/o feathers exoskeleton other skin with feathers biped no wings no wings, non biped no wings, non biped wings, non-biped no wings, non biped wings, biped live birth eggs w/o meta live birth egss w. meta other eggs w/o meta Step 2: Nam e Clas s Feature 1 (habitat) Feature 2 (diet) Feature 3 (integum ent) Feature 4 (m orphology) Feature 5 (life cycle) 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 1 4 3 1 3 1 4 5 2 3 4 4 1 4 2 1 3 1 2 4 3 Numeric to Nominal Quantization “Clusters” Usually Mean Something How many objects are shown here? One, seen from various perspectives! This illustrates the danger of using ONE METHOD/TOOL/VISUALIZATION! Autoclustering • Automatically find spatial patterns in complex data – find patterns in data – measure the complexity of the data Differential Analysis • Discover the Difference “Drivers” Between Groups – Which combination of features accounts for the observed differences between groups? – Focus research Sensitivity Analysis • Measure the Influence of Individual Features on Outcomes – Rank order features by salience and independence – Estimate problem difficulty Rule Induction • Automatically find semantic patterns in complex data – discover rules directly from data – organize “raw” data into actionable knowledge A Rule Induction Example (using data splits) Rule Induction Example (Data Splits) 4. Modeling What question are we answering? How deeply buried in the data is the answer? How must the answer be presented to the user? What question are we answering? •Ground truth type –Nominal –Numeric –Complex (e.g., interval estimate, plan, concept) •Ground truth data quality –Low/high SNR –Few/many gaps –Easy/hard to access –Objective/subjective •Ground truth predictability –Correlation with features –Population balance –Class collisions How deeply buried in the data is the answer? •Solvable by a 1 layer Multi-Layer Perceptron (easy) –Linearly separable; any two classes can be separated by a hyperplane •Solvable by a 2 layer Multi-Layer Perceptron (moderate) –Convex hulls of classes overlap, but classes do not •Solvable by a 3 layer Multi-Layer Perceptron (hard) –Classes overlap but do not “collide” •“intractable” –Data contain class collisions How must the answer be presented to the user? •Forensics –GUI, confidence factors, intervals, justification •Integration –Web-based, Web-enable, dll/sl, fully integrated •Accuracy –% correct, confusion matrix, lift chart •Performance –Throughput, ease of use, accuracy, reliability Text Book Neural Network Knowledge Acquisition What the Expert says: KE: ...and, primates. What evidence makes you CERTAIN an animal is a primate? KE: Yeah, well, like...If it’s a land animal that’ll eat anything...but it bears live young and walks upright,... KE: Any obvious physical characteristics? EX: Uh...yes...and no feathers, of course, or wings, or any of that... Well, then...then, it’s gotta be a primate...yeah. KE: So, ANY animal which is a land-dwelling, omnivorous, skincovered, unwinged featherless biped which bears live young is NECESSARILY a primate? EX: Yep. KE: Could such an animal, be, say, a fish? EX: No...it couldn’t be anything but a primate. What the KE hears: IF (f1,f2,f3,f4,f5) = (land, omni, feathers, wingless biped, born alive) THEN PRIMATE and (not fish, not domestic, not bug, not germ, not bird) Evaluation How must the answer be presented to the user? Model Evaluation • Accuracy – – – – – – Classification accuracy, geometric accuracy precision/recall RMS Lift curve Confusion matrices ROI • Speed, space, utility, other Classification Errors Prediction = Ground Truth 1 2 3 PRECISION Type I Error 1 302 128 35 64.9% 35.1% 2 55 526 68 81.0% 19.0% 3 RECALL 21 79.9% 194 62.0% 469 82.0% 68.6% 31.4% Type II Error 20.1% 38.0% 18.0% • Type I - Accepting an item as a member of a class when it is actually false: a “false positive”. • Type II - Rejecting an item as a member of a class when it actually is (true) a “false negative”. Model Maintenance • • • • Retraining, stationarity Generalization (e.g. heteroscedasticity) Changing the feature set (add/subtract) Conventional maintenance issues What do we give the user besides an application? • • • • Documentation Support Model retraining New model generation Using a Paradigm Taxonomy to Select a DM Algorithm Place paradigms into a taxonomy by specifying their attributes. This taxonomy can be used for algorithm selection. First, an example taxonomy…. KBES (knowledge-based Expert System) required intuition: high vector count supported: high feature count supported: medium class count supported: medium cost to develop: high schedule to develop: high talent to develop: medium, high tools to develop: can be expensive to buy/make feature types supported: nominal/numeric/complex feature mix supported: homogeneous, heterogeneous feature data quality needed: need not fill "gaps" ground truth types supported: nominal, complex relative representational power: low relative performance: fast, intuitive, robust relative weaknesses: ad hoc; relatively simple class boundaries relative strengths: intuitive; easy to provide conclusion justification MLP (Multi-Layer Perceptron) required intuition: low vector count supported: high feature count supported: medium class count supported: medium cost to develop: low schedule to develop: medium talent to develop: medium tools to develop: easy to obtain inexpensively feature types supported: numeric feature mix supported: homogeneous feature data quality needed: must fill "gaps" ground truth types supported: nominal, numeric relative representational power: high relative performance: moderately fast relative weaknesses: inscrutable; uncontrolled regression relative strengths: easy to build RBF (Radial Basis Function) required intuition: low vector count supported: high feature count supported: medium class count supported: high cost to develop: low schedule to develop: medium talent to develop: medium tools to develop: easy to obtain inexpensively feature types supported: numeric feature mix supported: homogeneous feature data quality needed: need not fill "gaps" ground truth types supported: nominal, numeric relative representational power: high relative performance: moderately fast relative weaknesses: inscrutable; models tend to be large relative strengths: uncontrolled regression can be mitigated SVM (Support Vector Machines) required intuition: low vector count supported: high feature count supported: high class count supported: two cost to develop: medium schedule to develop: medium talent to develop: medium tools to develop: easy to obtain inexpensively feature types supported: numeric feature mix supported: homogeneous feature data quality needed: must fill "gaps" ground truth types supported: nominal, numeric relative representational power: high relative performance: moderately fast relative weaknesses: inscrutable; can be hard to train relative strengths: minimal need to enhance features Decision Trees (e.g., CART, BBN’s) required intuition: low vector count supported: high feature count supported: medium class count supported: high cost to develop: low schedule to develop: medium talent to develop: medium tools to develop: easy to obtain inexpensively feature types supported: nominal, numeric feature mix supported: homogeneous, heterogeneous feature data quality needed: need not fill "gaps" ground truth types supported: nominal, numeric relative representational power: high relative performance: moderately fast relative weaknesses: many "low support" nodes or rules relative strengths: can provide insight into the domain The taxonomy can be used to match available paradigms with the characteristics of the data mining problem to be addressed… IF the ground truth is discrete; there aren't too many classes; the class boundaries are simple; the number of features is medium; the data are heterogeneous; no comprehensive, representative data set with GT; the population is unbalanced by class; the domain is well-understood by available experts; conclusion justification is needed; THEN KBES ELSE IF the ground truth is numeric; there is a medium number of classes; the class boundaries are complex; the number of features is medium; the data are numeric; comprehensive, representative data set tagged with GT; the population is relatively balanced by class; the domain is not well-understood by available experts; conclusion justification is not needed; THEN MLP ELSE IF the ground truth is numeric or nominal; there is a large number of classes; the class boundaries are very complex; the number of features is medium; the data are numeric; representative data set tagged with GT; the population is unbalanced by class; the domain is not well-understood by available experts; conclusion justification is not needed; THEN RBF ELSE IF the ground truth is numeric or nominal; the number of classes is two; the class boundaries very complex; the number of features is very large; the data are numeric; comprehensive, representative data set tagged with GT; the population is unbalanced by class; the domain is not well-understood by available experts; conclusion justification is not needed; THEN SVM ELSE IF the ground truth is numeric or nominal; there is a medium number of classes; the class boundaries are very complex; the number of features is medium; the data are numeric, nominal, or complex; representative data set tagged with GT; the population is unbalanced by class; the domain is not well-understood by available experts; conclusion justification is needed; THEN Decision Tree (CART, BBN, etc.) END IF Common Reasons Data Mining Projects Fail Mistakes can occur in each major element of data mining practice! 1. Specification of Enterprise Objectives – Defining “success” 2. Creation of the DM Environment – Understanding and Preparing the Data 3. Data Mining Management 4a,b. Descriptive Modeling and Predictive Modeling – Detecting and Characterizing Patterns – Building Models 5. Model Evaluation 6. Model Deployment 7. Model Maintenance 1. Specification of Enterprise Objectives Define “success”: • Knowledge acquisition interviews (who, what, how) • Objective measures of performance (enterprise specific) • Assessment of enterprise process and data environment • Specification of data mining objectives Specification Mistakes • DM projects require careful management of user expectations. Choosing the wrong person as customer interface can guarantee user disappointment. (GIGOO: Garbage in, GOLD out!) • Since the default assessment of “R&D type” efforts is “failure”, not defining “success” unambiguously will guarantee “failure”. 2. Creation of the DM Environment • • • • Data Warehouse/Data Mart /Database Meta data and schemas Data dependencies Access paths and mechanisms Environmental Mistakes • Big data require bigger storage. DM efforts typically work against multiple copies of the data; try 2 or 3 x. • Unwillingness to invest in tools forces data miners to consume resources building inferior versions of what could have been purchased more cheaply. • Get labs and network connections set up quickly. Understanding the Data • Enterprise data survey – Data as a process artifact – Temporal Considerations • Data Characterization – Metadata – Collection paths • Data Metrics and Quality – currency, completeness, correctness, correlation A List of Common Data Problems • • • • • • • • • • Conformation (e.g., a dozen ways to say lat/lon) Accessibility (distributed, sensitive) Ground Truth (missing, incorrect) Outliers (detect/process) Gaps (imputation scheme) Time (coverage, periodicity, trends, Nyquist) Consistency (intra/inter record) Class collisions (how to adjudicate) Class population imbalance (balancing) Coding/quantization Data Understanding Mistakes • Assuming that no understanding of the domain is needed for a successful DM effort • Temporal infeasibility: assuming every type of data you find in the warehouse will actually be there when your fielded system needs it. • Ignoring the data conformation problem Data Preparation Mistakes • • • • Improper handling of missing data, outliers Improper conditioning of data “Trojan Horsing” ground truth into the feature set Having no plan for getting operational access to data 3. Data Mining Management • Data mining skill mix (who are the DM practitioners?) • Data mining project planning (RAD vs. waterfall) • Data mining project management • Sample DM project cost/schedule • Don’t forget Configuration Management! DM Management Mistakes • Appointing a “domain expert” as the technical lead on a DM project virtually guarantees that no new ground will covered. • Inadequate schedule and/or budget poison the psychological atmosphere necessary for discovery. • Failure to parallelize work • Allowing planless tinkering • Letting technical people “snow” you • Failure to conduct “process audits” Configuration Management • Nomenclature and naming conventions • Documenting the workflow for reproducibility • Modeling Process Automation Configuration Management Mistakes • Not having a configuration management plan (files, directories, nomenclature, audit trail) virtually guarantees that any success you have will be unreproduceable. • Allowing each data miner to establish their own documentation and auditing procedures guarantees that no one will understand what anyone else has done. • Failure to automate configuration management (e.g., putting annotated experiment scripts in a log) guarantees that your configuration management plan will not work. 4a. Descriptive Modeling • • • • • • • OLAP (on-line analytical processing) Visualization Unsupervised learning Link/Market Basket Analysis Collaborative Filtering Rule Induction Techniques Logistic Regression 4b. Predictive Modeling • • • • • • • Paradigms Test Design Meta-Schemes Model Construction Model Evaluation Model Deployment Model Maintenance Paradigms • • • • • Know what they are Know when to use which Know how to instantiate them Know how to validate them Know how to maintain them Model Construction • • • • • Architecture (monolithic, hybrid) Formulation of Objective Function Training (e.g., NN) Construction (e.g., KBES) Meta Schemes – Bagging – Boosting – Post-process model calibration Modeling Mistakes • The “Silver Bullet Syndrome”: relying entirely on a single tool/method • Expecting your tools to think for you • Overreliance on visualization • Using tools that you don’t understand • Not knowing when to quit (maybe this is just dirt) • Quitting too soon (I haven’t dug deep enough) • Picking the wrong modeling paradigm • Ignoring population imbalance • Overtraining • Ignoring feature correlation 5. Model Evaluation • Blind Testing • N-fold Cross-Validation • Generalization and Overtraining Model Evaluation Mistakes • Not validating the model • Validating the model on the training data • Not escrowing a “holdback set” 6. Model Deployment • ASP (applications service provider) • API (application program interface) • Other – plug-ins – linked objects – file interface, etc. Model Deployment Mistakes • Not considering the fielded architecture • No user training • Not having any operational performance requirements (except “accuracy”) 7. Model Maintenance • Retraining • Poor generalization – Heteroscedasticity – Non-stationarity – Overtraining • Changing the problem architecture – Adding/subtracting features – Modifying ground truth • Other Model Maintenance Mistakes • Not having a mechanism, method, and criteria for tracking performance of the fielded model • Not providing a model “retraining” capability • No documentation, no support Published by: Digital Press, 2001 ISBN: 1-555558-231-1