Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,340

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mining sequential patterns by pattern-growth: the PrefixSpan approach

Jian Pei, Jiawei Han, Mortazavi-Asl, B., Jianyong Wang, Pinto, H., Qiming Chen, Dayal, U., Mei-Chun Hsu·2004·IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering

Abstract

Sequential pattern mining is an important data mining problem with broad applications. However, it is also a difficult problem since the mining may have to generate or examine a combinatorially explosive number of intermediate subsequences. Most of the previously developed sequential pattern mining methods, such as GSP, explore a candidate generation-and-test approach [R. Agrawal et al. (1994)] to reduce the number of candidates to be examined. However, this approach may not be efficient in mining large sequence databases having numerous patterns and/or long patterns. In this paper, we propose a projection-based, sequential pattern-growth approach for efficient mining of sequential patterns. In this approach, a sequence database is recursively projected into a set of smaller projected databases, and sequential patterns are grown in each projected database by exploring only locally frequent fragments. Based on an initial study of the pattern growth-based sequential pattern mining, FreeSpan [J. Han et al. (2000)], we propose a more efficient method, called PSP, which offers ordered growth and reduced projected databases. To further improve the performance, a pseudoprojection technique is developed in PrefixSpan. A comprehensive performance study shows that PrefixSpan, in most cases, outperforms the a priori-based algorithm GSP, FreeSpan, and SPADE [M. Zaki, (2001)] (a sequential pattern mining algorithm that adopts vertical data format), and PrefixSpan integrated with pseudoprojection is the fastest among all the tested algorithms. Furthermore, this mining methodology can be extended to mining sequential patterns with user-specified constraints. The high promise of the pattern-growth approach may lead to its further extension toward efficient mining of other kinds of frequent patterns, such as frequent substructures.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tkde.2004.77

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 1,340

Metadata

Authors
Pei, J., Han, J., Mortazavi-Asl, B., Wang, J., Pinto, H., Chen, Q., Dayal, U., & Hsu, M.-C.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering
Published
2004-11
Volume
16
Issue
11
Pages
1424-1440
ISSN
1041-4347 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2168196587
Cited by
1,340
References
1
FWCI
107.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.