Abstract

Abstract

Abstract
Due to the wide variety of algorithms for supervised classification originating from several research areas, selecting one of them to apply on a given problem is not a trivial task. Recently several methods have been developed to create rankings of classification algorithms based on their previous performance. Therefore, it is necessary to develop techniques to evaluate and compare those methods. We present three measures to evaluate rankings of classification algorithms, give examples of their use and discuss their characteristics.

Abstract
We propose a Multi-Agent framework to analyze the dynamics of organizational survival in cooperation networks. Firms can decide to cooperate horizontally (in the same market) or vertically with other firms that belong to the supply chain. Cooperation decisions are based on economic variables. We have defined a variant of the density dependence model to set up the dynamics of the survival in the simulation. To validate our model, we have used empirical outputs obtained in previous studies from the automobile manufacturing sector. We have observed that firms and networks proliferate in the regions with lower marginal costs, but new networks keep appearing and disappearing in regions with higher marginal costs.

Abstract
In this paper we are concerned with the problem of inducing recursive Horn clauses from small sets of training examples. The method of iterative bootstrap induction is presented. In the first step, the system generates simple clauses, which can be regarded as properties of the required definition. Properties represent generalizations of the positive examples, simulating the effect of having larger number of examples. Properties are used subsequently to induce the required recursive definitions. This paper describes the method together with a series of experiments. The results support the thesis that iterative bootstrap induction is indeed an effective technique that could be of general use in ILP.

Abstract
Many state-of-the-art ILP systems require large numbers of negative examples to avoid overgeneralization. This is a considerable disadvantage for many ILP applications, namely inductive program synthesis where relativelly small and sparse example sets are a more realistic scenario. Integrity constraints are first order clauses that can play the role of negative examples in an inductive process. One integrity constraint can replace a long list of ground negative examples. However, checking the consistency of a program with a set of integrity constraints usually involves heavy theorem-proving. We propose an efficient constraint satisfaction algorithm that applies to a wide variety of useful integrity constraints and uses a Monte Carlo strategy. It looks for inconsistencies by random generation of queries to the program. This method allows the use of integrity constraints instead of (or together with) negative examples. As a consequence programs to induce can be specified more rapidly by the user and the ILP system tends to obtain more accurate definitions. Average running times are not greatly affected by the use of integrity constraints compared to ground negative examples.