Cited by 4Data Mining Algorithms and ApplicationsPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataData Mining and Machine Learning Applications

Alice and the Caterpillar: A More Descriptive Null Model for Assessing Data Mining Results

Preti, Giulia, Morales, Gianmarco de Francisci, Riondato, Matteo·2022·2022 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM)

Abstract

“One side will make you grow taller, and the other side will make you grow shorter – The Caterpillar, Alice in Wonderland We introduce a novel null model for assessing the results obtained by analyzing an observed transactional dataset (e.g., significant frequent itemsets) using statistical hypothesis testing. Our null model maintains more properties of the observed dataset than existing models. Specifically, we preserve the Bipartite Joint Degree Matrix of the bipartite graph corresponding to the dataset, which ensures that the number of caterpillars, i.e., paths of length three, is preserved, in addition to the item supports and the transaction lengths, which are the properties considered by previous works. We describe ALICE, a suite of two Markov-Chain Monte-Carlo algorithms for sampling datasets from our null model, based on a carefully defined set of states and efficient operations to move between them. The results of our experimental evaluation show that ALICE mixes fast and scales well, and that our null model finds different significant results than ones previously considered in the literature.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icdm54844.2022.00052

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Different null assumptions, such as preserving degree sequences versus erasing all structure, yield conflicting baselines, so post-hoc normalization risks over- or under-correction.

    “As such, they risk over- or under-correction, as different null assumptions (e.g., preserving degree sequences vs. erasing all structure) yield conflicting baselines [35].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Preti, G., Morales, G. D. F., & Riondato, M.
Affiliations
  • CentAI,Turin,Italy
  • Amherst College (US)
Venue
2022 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2022-11
Pages
418-427
ISSN
1550-4786 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4320060304
Cited by
4
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2023: 3
FWCI
0.67
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Proceedings (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Data Mining Algorithms and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Data Mining and Machine Learning Applications
Keywords
null models, frequent itemsets, significance testing, Markov chain Monte Carlo, transaction data, ALICE, hypothesis testing, bipartite graphs

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review