Berry M.J.A. – Data Mining Techniques For Marketing, Sales & Customer Relationship Management

■■

Reduction in variance

■■

F test

Note that the choice of an appropriate purity measure depends on whether the target variable is categorical or numeric. The type of the input variable does not matter, so an entire tree is built with the same purity measure. The split illustrated in 6.5 might be provided by a numeric input variable (AGE > 46) or by a categorical variable (STATE is a member of CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, VT). The purity of the children is the same regardless of the type of split.

Gini or Population Diversity

One popular splitting criterion is named Gini, after Italian statistician and economist, Corrado Gini. This measure, which is also used by biologists and ecologists studying population diversity, gives the probability that two items chosen at random from the same population are in the same class. For a pure population, this probability is 1.

The Gini measure of a node is simply the sum of the squares of the proportions of the classes. For the split shown in Figure 6.5, the parent population has an equal number of light and dark dots. A node with equal numbers of each of 2 classes has a score of 0.52 + 0.52 = 0.5, which is expected because the chance of picking the same class twice by random selection with replacement is one out of two. The Gini score for either of the resulting nodes is 0.12 + 0.92 = 0.82. A perfectly pure node would have a Gini score of 1. A node that is evenly balanced would have a Gini score of 0.5. Sometimes the scores is doubled and then 1 subtracted, so it is between 0 and 1. However, such a manipulation makes no difference when comparing different scores to optimize purity.

To calculate the impact of a split, take the Gini score of each child node and multiply it by the proportion of records that reach that node and then sum the resulting numbers. In this case, since the records are split evenly between the two nodes resulting from the split and each node has the same Gini score, the score for the split is the same as for either of the two nodes.

470643 c06.qxd 3/8/04 11:12 AM Page 179

Decision Trees 179

Entropy Reduction or Information Gain

Information gain uses a clever idea for defining purity. If a leaf is entirely pure, then the classes in the leaf can be easily described—they all fall in the same class. On the other hand, if a leaf is highly impure, then describing it is much more complicated. Information theory, a part of computer science, has devised a measure for this situation called entropy. In information theory, entropy is a measure of how disorganized a system is. A comprehensive introduction to information theory is far beyond the scope of this book. For our purposes, the intuitive notion is that the number of bits required to describe a particular situation or outcome depends on the size of the set of possible outcomes. Entropy can be thought of as a measure of the number of yes/no questions it would take to determine the state of the system. If there are 16 possible states, it takes log2(16), or four bits, to enumerate them or identify a particular one. Additional information reduces the number of questions needed to determine the state of the system, so information gain means the same thing as entropy reduction. Both terms are used to describe decision tree algorithms.

The entropy of a particular decision tree node is the sum, over all the classes represented in the node, of the proportion of records belonging to a particular class multiplied by the base two logarithm of that proportion. (Actually, this sum is usually multiplied by –1 in order to obtain a positive number.) The entropy of a split is simply the sum of the entropies of all the nodes resulting from the split weighted by each node’s proportion of the records. When entropy reduction is chosen as a splitting criterion, the algorithm searches for the split that reduces entropy (or, equivalently, increases information) by the greatest amount.

For a binary target variable such as the one shown in Figure 6.5, the formula for the entropy of a single node is

-1 * ( P(dark)log P(dark) + P(light)log P(light) ) 2

2

In this example, P(dark) and P(light) are both one half. Plugging 0.5 into the entropy formula gives:

-1 * (0.5 log (0.5) + 0.5 log (0.5))

2

2

The first term is for the light dots and the second term is for the dark dots, but since there are equal numbers of light and dark dots, the expression simplifies to –1 * log2(0.5) which is +1. What is the entropy of the nodes resulting from the split? One of them has one dark dot and nine light dots, while the other has nine dark dots and one light dots. Clearly, they each have the same level of entropy. Namely,

-1 * (0.1 log (0.1) + 0.9 log (0.9)) = 0.33 + 0.14 = 0.47

2

2

470643 c06.qxd 3/8/04 11:12 AM Page 180

180 Chapter 6

To calculate the total entropy of the system after the split, multiply the entropy of each node by the proportion of records that reach that node and add them up to get an average. In this example, each of the new nodes receives half the records, so the total entropy is the same as the entropy of each of the nodes, 0.47. The total entropy reduction or information gain due to the split is therefore 0.53. This is the figure that would be used to compare this split with other candidates.

Information Gain Ratio

The entropy split measure can run into trouble when combined with a splitting methodology that handles categorical input variables by creating a separate branch for each value. This was the case for ID3, a decision tree tool developed by Australian researcher J. Ross Quinlan in the nineteen-eighties, that became part of several commercial data mining software packages. The problem is that just by breaking the larger data set into many small subsets , the number of classes represented in each node tends to go down, and with it, the entropy. The decrease in entropy due solely to the number of branches is called the intrinsic information of a split. (Recall that entropy is defined as the sum over all the branches of the probability of each branch times the log base 2 of that probability. For a random n-way split, the probability of each branch is 1/n. Therefore, the entropy due solely to splitting from an n-way split is simply n * 1/n log (1/n) or log(1/n). Because of the intrinsic information of many-way splits, decision trees built using the entropy reduction splitting criterion without any correction for the intrinsic information due to the split tend to be quite bushy.

Bushy trees with many multi-way splits are undesirable as these splits lead to small numbers of records in each node, a recipe for unstable models.

In reaction to this problem, C5 and other descendents of ID3 that once used information gain now use the ratio of the total information gain due to a proposed split to the intrinsic information attributable solely to the number of branches created as the criterion for evaluating proposed splits. This test reduces the tendency towards very bushy trees that was a problem in earlier decision tree software packages.

Chi-Square Test

As described in Chapter 5, the chi-square (X2) test is a test of statistical significance developed by the English statistician Karl Pearson in 1900. Chi-square is defined as the sum of the squares of the standardized differences between the expected and observed frequencies of some occurrence between multiple disjoint samples. In other words, the test is a measure of the probability that an observed difference between samples is due only to chance. When used to measure the purity of decision tree splits, higher values of chi-square mean that the variation is more significant, and not due merely to chance.

470643 c06.qxd 3/8/04 11:12 AM Page 181

Decision Trees 181

COMPARING TWO SPLITS USING GINI AND ENTROPY

Consider the following two splits, illustrated in the figure below. In both cases, the population starts out perfectly balanced between dark and light dots with ten of each type. One proposed split is the same as in Figure 6.5 yielding two equal-sized nodes, one 90 percent dark and the other 90 percent light. The second split yields one node that is 100 percent pure dark, but only has 6 dots and another that that has 14 dots and is 71.4 percent light.

Which of these two proposed splits increases purity the most?

EVALUATING THE TWO SPLITS USING GINI

As explained in the main text, the Gini score for each of the two children in the first proposed split is 0.12 + 0.92 = 0.820. Since the children are the same size, this is also the score for the split.

Pages: 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 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154

Leave a Reply 0

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *