The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Efficient mining of emerging patterns: discovering trends and differences
Abstract
We introduce a new kind of patterns, called emerging patterns (EPs), for knowledge discovery from databases. EPs are defined as itemsets whose supports increase significantly from one dataset to another. EPs can capture emerging trends in timestamped databases, or useful contrasts between data classes. EPs have been proven useful: we have used them to build very powerful classifiers, which are more accurate than C4.5 and CBA, for many datasets. We believe that EPs with low to medium support, such as 1%-20%, can give useful new insights and guidance to experts, in even “well understood” applications. The efficient mining of EPs is a challenging problem, since (i) the Apriori property no longer holds for EPs, and (ii) there are usually too many candidates for high dimensional databases or for small support thresholds such as 0.5%. Naive algorithms are too costly. To solve this problem, (a) we promote the description of large collections of itemsets using their concise borders (the pair of sets of the minimal and of the maximal itemsets in the collections). (b) We design EP mining algorithms which manipulate only borders of collections (especially using our multiborder- differential algorithm), and which represent discovered EPs using borders. All EPs satisfying a constraint can be efficiently discovered by our border-based algorithms, which take the borders, derived by Max-Miner, of large itemsets as inputs. In our experiments on large and high dimensional datasets including the US census and Mushroom datasets, many EPs, including some with large cardinality, are found quickly. We also give other algorithms for discovering general or special types of EPs.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Data mining: concepts and techniques
(2012) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.49-3305 · Cited by 28,531
Mining frequent patterns without candidate generation
Han, J., Pei, J., & Yin, Y. (2000) · ACM SIGMOD Record · doi:10.1145/335191.335372 · Cited by 6,402
Frequent pattern mining: current status and future directions
Han, J., Cheng, H., Xin, D., & Yan, X. (2007) · Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1007/s10618-006-0059-1 · Cited by 1,380
Interpretable Decision Sets: A Joint Framework for Description and Prediction
Lakkaraju, H., Bach, S. H., & Leskovec, J. (2016) · Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining · doi:10.1145/2939672.2939874 · Cited by 687
Loyola-Gonzalez, O. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2949286 · Cited by 559
Metadata
- Authors
- Dong, G., & Li, J.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the fifth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 1999-08
- Pages
- 43-52
- OpenAlex
- W2038812321
- Cited by
- 1,018
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 19.12
- Type
- conference paper
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Efficient mining of emerging patterns: discovering trends and differences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/312129.312191
- The paper
- Dong, G., & Li, J. (1999). Efficient mining of emerging patterns: discovering trends and differences. Proceedings of the fifth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. https://doi.org/10.1145/312129.312191
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.