Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus)
April 2020 by Neslihan Suzen, PhD student at the University of Leicester (ns433@leicester.ac.uk) Supervised by Prof Alexander Gorban and Dr Evgeny MirkesThe data are extracted from the Web of Science [1]. You may not copy or distribute these data in whole or in part without the written consent of Clarivate Analytics.[Version 2] A further cleaning is applied in Data Processing for LSC Abstracts in Version 1*. Details of cleaning procedure are explained in Step 6.* Suzen, Neslihan (2019): LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus). figshare. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.25392/leicester.data.9449639.v1.Getting StartedThis text provides the information on the LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus) and pre-processing steps on abstracts, and describes the structure of files to organise the corpus. This corpus is created to be used in future work on the quantification of the meaning of research texts and make it available for use in Natural Language Processing projects.LSC is a collection of abstracts of articles and proceeding papers published in 2014, and indexed by the Web of Science (WoS) database [1]. The corpus contains only documents in English. Each document in the corpus contains the following parts:1. Authors: The list of authors of the paper2. Title: The title of the paper 3. Abstract: The abstract of the paper 4. Categories: One or more category from the list of categories [2]. Full list of categories is presented in file ‘List_of _Categories.txt’. 5. Research Areas: One or more research area from the list of research areas [3]. Full list of research areas is presented in file ‘List_of_Research_Areas.txt’. 6. Total Times cited: The number of times the paper was cited by other items from all databases within Web of Science platform [4] 7. Times cited in Core Collection: The total number of times the paper was cited by other papers within the WoS Core Collection [4]The corpus was collected in July 2018 online and contains the number of citations from publication date to July 2018. We describe a document as the collection of information (about a paper) listed above. The total number of documents in LSC is 1,673,350.Data ProcessingStep 1: Downloading of the Data Online
The dataset is collected manually by exporting documents as Tab-delimitated files online. All documents are available online.Step 2: Importing the Dataset to R
The LSC was collected as TXT files. All documents are extracted to R.Step 3: Cleaning the Data from Documents with Empty Abstract or without CategoryAs our research is based on the analysis of abstracts and categories, all documents with empty abstracts and documents without categories are removed.Step 4: Identification and Correction of Concatenate Words in AbstractsEspecially medicine-related publications use ‘structured abstracts’. Such type of abstracts are divided into sections with distinct headings such as introduction, aim, objective, method, result, conclusion etc. Used tool for extracting abstracts leads concatenate words of section headings with the first word of the section. For instance, we observe words such as ConclusionHigher and ConclusionsRT etc. The detection and identification of such words is done by sampling of medicine-related publications with human intervention. Detected concatenate words are split into two words. For instance, the word ‘ConclusionHigher’ is split into ‘Conclusion’ and ‘Higher’.The section headings in such abstracts are listed below:
Background Method(s) Design Theoretical Measurement(s) Location Aim(s) Methodology Process Abstract Population Approach Objective(s) Purpose(s) Subject(s) Introduction Implication(s) Patient(s) Procedure(s) Hypothesis Measure(s) Setting(s) Limitation(s) Discussion Conclusion(s) Result(s) Finding(s) Material (s) Rationale(s) Implications for health and nursing policyStep 5: Extracting (Sub-setting) the Data Based on Lengths of AbstractsAfter correction, the lengths of abstracts are calculated. ‘Length’ indicates the total number of words in the text, calculated by the same rule as for Microsoft Word ‘word count’ [5].According to APA style manual [6], an abstract should contain between 150 to 250 words. In LSC, we decided to limit length of abstracts from 30 to 500 words in order to study documents with abstracts of typical length ranges and to avoid the effect of the length to the analysis.
Step 6: [Version 2] Cleaning Copyright Notices, Permission polices, Journal Names and Conference Names from LSC Abstracts in Version 1Publications can include a footer of copyright notice, permission policy, journal name, licence, author’s right or conference name below the text of abstract by conferences and journals. Used tool for extracting and processing abstracts in WoS database leads to attached such footers to the text. For example, our casual observation yields that copyright notices such as ‘Published by Elsevier ltd.’ is placed in many texts. To avoid abnormal appearances of words in further analysis of words such as bias in frequency calculation, we performed a cleaning procedure on such sentences and phrases in abstracts of LSC version 1. We removed copyright notices, names of conferences, names of journals, authors’ rights, licenses and permission policies identified by sampling of abstracts.Step 7: [Version 2] Re-extracting (Sub-setting) the Data Based on Lengths of AbstractsThe cleaning procedure described in previous step leaded to some abstracts having less than our minimum length criteria (30 words). 474 texts were removed.Step 8: Saving the Dataset into CSV FormatDocuments are saved into 34 CSV files. In CSV files, the information is organised with one record on each line and parts of abstract, title, list of authors, list of categories, list of research areas, and times cited is recorded in fields.To access the LSC for research purposes, please email to ns433@le.ac.uk.References[1]Web of Science. (15 July). Available: https://apps.webofknowledge.com/ [2]WoS Subject Categories. Available: https://images.webofknowledge.com/WOKRS56B5/help/WOS/hp_subject_category_terms_tasca.html [3]Research Areas in WoS. Available: https://images.webofknowledge.com/images/help/WOS/hp_research_areas_easca.html [4]Times Cited in WoS Core Collection. (15 July). Available: https://support.clarivate.com/ScientificandAcademicResearch/s/article/Web-of-Science-Times-Cited-accessibility-and-variation?language=en_US [5]Word Count. Available: https://support.office.com/en-us/article/show-word-count-3c9e6a11-a04d-43b4-977c-563a0e0d5da3 [6]A. P. Association, Publication manual. American Psychological Association Washington, DC, 1983.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The Supplementary Material of the paper "Supplementary Material: Predictive model using Cross Industry Standard Process for Data Mining" includes: 1) APPENDIX 1: SQL Statements for data extraction. Appendix 2: Interview for operating Staff. 2) The DataSet of the normalized data to define the predictive model.
Facebook
Twitterhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
Any set of related activities that are executed in a repeatable manner and with a defined goal can be seen as process.
Process analytic approaches allow organizations to support the practice of Business Process Management and continuous improvement by leveraging all process-related data to extract knowledge, improve process performance and support managerial-decision making across the organization.
For organisations interested in continuous improvement, such datasets allow data-driven approach for identifying performance bottlenecks, reducing costs, extracting insights and optimizing the utilization of available resources. Understanding the properties of ‘current deployed process’ (whose execution trace is available), is critical to knowing whether it is worth investing in improvements, where performance problems exist, and how much variation there is in the process across the instances and what are the root-causes.
→ process of extracting valuable information from event logs/databases that are generated by processes.
Two topics are important i) process discovery where a process model describing the control flow is inferred from the data and ii) of conformance checking which deals with verifying that the behavior in the event log adheres to a set of business rules, e.g., defined as a process model. Rhese two use cases focus on the control-flow perspective,
→ identifying hidden nodes and bottlenecks in business processes.
A synthetic event log with 100,000 traces and 900,000 events that was generated by simulating a simple artificial process model. There are three data attributes in the event log: Priority, Nurse, and Type. Some paths in the model are recorded infrequently based on the value of these attributes.
Noise is added by randomly adding one additional event to an increasing number of traces. CPN Tools (http://cpntools.org) was used to generate the event log and inject the noise. The amount of noise can be controlled with the constant 'noise'.
The files test0 to test5 represent process traces and maybe used for debugging and sanity check purposes
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
We present a ProgSnap2-based dataset containing anonymized logs of over 34,000 programming events exhibited by 81 programming students in Scratch, a visual programming environment, during our designed study as described in the paper "Semi-Automatically Mining Students' Common Scratch Programming Behaviors." We also include a list of approx. 3100 mined sequential patterns of programming processes that are performed by at least 10% of the 62 of the 81 students who are novice programmers, and represent maximal patterns generated by the MG-FSM algorithm while allowing a gap of one programming event. README.txt — overview of the dataset and its propertiesmainTable.csv — main event table of the dataset holding rows of programming eventscodeState.csv — table holding XML representations of code snapshots at the time of each programming eventdatasetMetadata.csv — describes features of the datasetScratch-SeqPatterns.txt — list of sequential patterns mined from the Main Event Table
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
LScDC Word-Category RIG MatrixApril 2020 by Neslihan Suzen, PhD student at the University of Leicester (ns433@leicester.ac.uk / suzenneslihan@hotmail.com)Supervised by Prof Alexander Gorban and Dr Evgeny MirkesGetting StartedThis file describes the Word-Category RIG Matrix for theLeicester Scientific Corpus (LSC) [1], the procedure to build the matrix and introduces the Leicester Scientific Thesaurus (LScT) with the construction process. The Word-Category RIG Matrix is a 103,998 by 252 matrix, where rows correspond to words of Leicester Scientific Dictionary-Core (LScDC) [2] and columns correspond to 252 Web of Science (WoS) categories [3, 4, 5]. Each entry in the matrix corresponds to a pair (category,word). Its value for the pair shows the Relative Information Gain (RIG) on the belonging of a text from the LSC to the category from observing the word in this text. The CSV file of Word-Category RIG Matrix in the published archive is presented with two additional columns of the sum of RIGs in categories and the maximum of RIGs over categories (last two columns of the matrix). So, the file ‘Word-Category RIG Matrix.csv’ contains a total of 254 columns.This matrix is created to be used in future research on quantifying of meaning in scientific texts under the assumption that words have scientifically specific meanings in subject categories and the meaning can be estimated by information gains from word to categories. LScT (Leicester Scientific Thesaurus) is a scientific thesaurus of English. The thesaurus includes a list of 5,000 words from the LScDC. We consider ordering the words of LScDC by the sum of their RIGs in categories. That is, words are arranged in their informativeness in the scientific corpus LSC. Therefore, meaningfulness of words evaluated by words’ average informativeness in the categories. We have decided to include the most informative 5,000 words in the scientific thesaurus. Words as a Vector of Frequencies in WoS CategoriesEach word of the LScDC is represented as a vector of frequencies in WoS categories. Given the collection of the LSC texts, each entry of the vector consists of the number of texts containing the word in the corresponding category.It is noteworthy that texts in a corpus do not necessarily belong to a single category, as they are likely to correspond to multidisciplinary studies, specifically in a corpus of scientific texts. In other words, categories may not be exclusive. There are 252 WoS categories and a text can be assigned to at least 1 and at most 6 categories in the LSC. Using the binary calculation of frequencies, we introduce the presence of a word in a category. We create a vector of frequencies for each word, where dimensions are categories in the corpus.The collection of vectors, with all words and categories in the entire corpus, can be shown in a table, where each entry corresponds to a pair (word,category). This table is build for the LScDC with 252 WoS categories and presented in published archive with this file. The value of each entry in the table shows how many times a word of LScDC appears in a WoS category. The occurrence of a word in a category is determined by counting the number of the LSC texts containing the word in a category. Words as a Vector of Relative Information Gains Extracted for CategoriesIn this section, we introduce our approach to representation of a word as a vector of relative information gains for categories under the assumption that meaning of a word can be quantified by their information gained for categories.For each category, a function is defined on texts that takes the value 1, if the text belongs to the category, and 0 otherwise. For each word, a function is defined on texts that takes the value 1 if the word belongs to the text, and 0 otherwise. Consider LSC as a probabilistic sample space (the space of equally probable elementary outcomes). For the Boolean random variables, the joint probability distribution, the entropy and information gains are defined.The information gain about the category from the word is the amount of information on the belonging of a text from the LSC to the category from observing the word in the text [6]. We used the Relative Information Gain (RIG) providing a normalised measure of the Information Gain. This provides the ability of comparing information gains for different categories. The calculations of entropy, Information Gains and Relative Information Gains can be found in the README file in the archive published. Given a word, we created a vector where each component of the vector corresponds to a category. Therefore, each word is represented as a vector of relative information gains. It is obvious that the dimension of vector for each word is the number of categories. The set of vectors is used to form the Word-Category RIG Matrix, in which each column corresponds to a category, each row corresponds to a word and each component is the relative information gain from the word to the category. In Word-Category RIG Matrix, a row vector represents the corresponding word as a vector of RIGs in categories. We note that in the matrix, a column vector represents RIGs of all words in an individual category. If we choose an arbitrary category, words can be ordered by their RIGs from the most informative to the least informative for the category. As well as ordering words in each category, words can be ordered by two criteria: sum and maximum of RIGs in categories. The top n words in this list can be considered as the most informative words in the scientific texts. For a given word, the sum and maximum of RIGs are calculated from the Word-Category RIG Matrix.RIGs for each word of LScDC in 252 categories are calculated and vectors of words are formed. We then form the Word-Category RIG Matrix for the LSC. For each word, the sum (S) and maximum (M) of RIGs in categories are calculated and added at the end of the matrix (last two columns of the matrix). The Word-Category RIG Matrix for the LScDC with 252 categories, the sum of RIGs in categories and the maximum of RIGs over categories can be found in the database.Leicester Scientific Thesaurus (LScT)Leicester Scientific Thesaurus (LScT) is a list of 5,000 words form the LScDC [2]. Words of LScDC are sorted in descending order by the sum (S) of RIGs in categories and the top 5,000 words are selected to be included in the LScT. We consider these 5,000 words as the most meaningful words in the scientific corpus. In other words, meaningfulness of words evaluated by words’ average informativeness in the categories and the list of these words are considered as a ‘thesaurus’ for science. The LScT with value of sum can be found as CSV file with the published archive. Published archive contains following files:1) Word_Category_RIG_Matrix.csv: A 103,998 by 254 matrix where columns are 252 WoS categories, the sum (S) and the maximum (M) of RIGs in categories (last two columns of the matrix), and rows are words of LScDC. Each entry in the first 252 columns is RIG from the word to the category. Words are ordered as in the LScDC.2) Word_Category_Frequency_Matrix.csv: A 103,998 by 252 matrix where columns are 252 WoS categories and rows are words of LScDC. Each entry of the matrix is the number of texts containing the word in the corresponding category. Words are ordered as in the LScDC.3) LScT.csv: List of words of LScT with sum (S) values. 4) Text_No_in_Cat.csv: The number of texts in categories. 5) Categories_in_Documents.csv: List of WoS categories for each document of the LSC.6) README.txt: Description of Word-Category RIG Matrix, Word-Category Frequency Matrix and LScT and forming procedures.7) README.pdf (same as 6 in PDF format)References[1] Suzen, Neslihan (2019): LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus). figshare. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.25392/leicester.data.9449639.v2[2] Suzen, Neslihan (2019): LScDC (Leicester Scientific Dictionary-Core). figshare. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.25392/leicester.data.9896579.v3[3] Web of Science. (15 July). Available: https://apps.webofknowledge.com/[4] WoS Subject Categories. Available: https://images.webofknowledge.com/WOKRS56B5/help/WOS/hp_subject_category_terms_tasca.html [5] Suzen, N., Mirkes, E. M., & Gorban, A. N. (2019). LScDC-new large scientific dictionary. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.06858. [6] Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell system technical journal, 27(3), 379-423.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The LScDC (Leicester Scientific Dictionary-Core Dictionary)April 2020 by Neslihan Suzen, PhD student at the University of Leicester (ns433@leicester.ac.uk/suzenneslihan@hotmail.com)Supervised by Prof Alexander Gorban and Dr Evgeny Mirkes[Version 3] The third version of LScDC (Leicester Scientific Dictionary-Core) is formed using the updated LScD (Leicester Scientific Dictionary) - Version 3*. All steps applied to build the new version of core dictionary are the same as in Version 2** and can be found in description of Version 2 below. We did not repeat the explanation. The files provided with this description are also same as described as for LScDC Version 2. The numbers of words in the 3rd versions of LScD and LScDC are summarized below. # of wordsLScD (v3) 972,060LScDC (v3) 103,998 * Suzen, Neslihan (2019): LScD (Leicester Scientific Dictionary). figshare. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.25392/leicester.data.9746900.v3 ** Suzen, Neslihan (2019): LScDC (Leicester Scientific Dictionary-Core). figshare. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.25392/leicester.data.9896579.v2[Version 2] Getting StartedThis file describes a sorted and cleaned list of words from LScD (Leicester Scientific Dictionary), explains steps for sub-setting the LScD and basic statistics of words in the LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus), to be found in [1, 2]. The LScDC (Leicester Scientific Dictionary-Core) is a list of words ordered by the number of documents containing the words, and is available in the CSV file published. There are 104,223 unique words (lemmas) in the LScDC. This dictionary is created to be used in future work on the quantification of the sense of research texts. The objective of sub-setting the LScD is to discard words which appear too rarely in the corpus. In text mining algorithms, usage of enormous number of text data brings the challenge to the performance and the accuracy of data mining applications. The performance and the accuracy of models are heavily depend on the type of words (such as stop words and content words) and the number of words in the corpus. Rare occurrence of words in a collection is not useful in discriminating texts in large corpora as rare words are likely to be non-informative signals (or noise) and redundant in the collection of texts. The selection of relevant words also holds out the possibility of more effective and faster operation of text mining algorithms.To build the LScDC, we decided the following process on LScD: removing words that appear in no more than 10 documents (
Facebook
TwitterDATA MINING THE GALAXY ZOO MERGERS STEVEN BAEHR, ARUN VEDACHALAM, KIRK BORNE, AND DANIEL SPONSELLER Abstract. Collisions between pairs of galaxies usually end in the coalescence (merger) of the two galaxies. Collisions and mergers are rare phenomena, yet they may signal the ultimate fate of most galaxies, including our own Milky Way. With the onset of massive collection of astronomical data, a computerized and automated method will be necessary for identifying those colliding galaxies worthy of more detailed study. This project researches methods to accomplish that goal. Astronomical data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) and human-provided classifications on merger status from the Galaxy Zoo project are combined and processed with machine learning algorithms. The goal is to determine indicators of merger status based solely on discovering those automated pipeline-generated attributes in the astronomical database that correlate most strongly with the patterns identified through visual inspection by the Galaxy Zoo volunteers. In the end, we aim to provide a new and improved automated procedure for classification of collisions and mergers in future petascale astronomical sky surveys. Both information gain analysis (via the C4.5 decision tree algorithm) and cluster analysis (via the Davies-Bouldin Index) are explored as techniques for finding the strongest correlations between human-identified patterns and existing database attributes. Galaxy attributes measured in the SDSS green waveband images are found to represent the most influential of the attributes for correct classification of collisions and mergers. Only a nominal information gain is noted in this research, however, there is a clear indication of which attributes contribute so that a direction for further study is apparent.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The purpose of data mining analysis is always to find patterns of the data using certain kind of techiques such as classification or regression. It is not always feasible to apply classification algorithms directly to dataset. Before doing any work on the data, the data has to be pre-processed and this process normally involves feature selection and dimensionality reduction. We tried to use clustering as a way to reduce the dimension of the data and create new features. Based on our project, after using clustering prior to classification, the performance has not improved much. The reason why it has not improved could be the features we selected to perform clustering are not well suited for it. Because of the nature of the data, classification tasks are going to provide more information to work with in terms of improving knowledge and overall performance metrics. From the dimensionality reduction perspective: It is different from Principle Component Analysis which guarantees finding the best linear transformation that reduces the number of dimensions with a minimum loss of information. Using clusters as a technique of reducing the data dimension will lose a lot of information since clustering techniques are based a metric of 'distance'. At high dimensions euclidean distance loses pretty much all meaning. Therefore using clustering as a "Reducing" dimensionality by mapping data points to cluster numbers is not always good since you may lose almost all the information. From the creating new features perspective: Clustering analysis creates labels based on the patterns of the data, it brings uncertainties into the data. By using clustering prior to classification, the decision on the number of clusters will highly affect the performance of the clustering, then affect the performance of classification. If the part of features we use clustering techniques on is very suited for it, it might increase the overall performance on classification. For example, if the features we use k-means on are numerical and the dimension is small, the overall classification performance may be better. We did not lock in the clustering outputs using a random_state in the effort to see if they were stable. Our assumption was that if the results vary highly from run to run which they definitely did, maybe the data just does not cluster well with the methods selected at all. Basically, the ramification we saw was that our results are not much better than random when applying clustering to the data preprocessing. Finally, it is important to ensure a feedback loop is in place to continuously collect the same data in the same format from which the models were created. This feedback loop can be used to measure the model real world effectiveness and also to continue to revise the models from time to time as things change.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
As semiconductor devices are miniaturized, the importance of atomic layer deposition (ALD) technology is growing. When designing ALD precursors, it is important to consider the melting point, because the precursors should have melting points lower than the process temperature. However, obtaining melting point data is challenging due to experimental sensitivity and high computational costs. As a result, a comprehensive and well-organized database for the melting point of the OMCs has not been fully reported yet. Therefore, in this study, we constructed a database of melting points for 1,845 OMCs, including 58 metal and 6 metalloid elements. The database contains CAS numbers, molecular formulas, and structural information and was constructed through automatic extraction and systematic curation. The melting point information was extracted using two methods: 1) 1,434 materials from 11 chemical vendor databases and 2) 411 materials identified through natural language processing (NLP) techniques with an accuracy of 86.3%, based on 2,096 scientific papers published over the past 29 years. In our database, the OMCs contain up to around 250 atoms and have melting points that range from −170 to 1610 °C. The main source is the Chemsrc database, accounting for 607 materials (32.9%), and Fe is the most common central metal or metalloid element (15.0%), followed by Si (11.6%) and B (6.7%). To validate the utilization of the constructed database, a multimodal neural network model was developed integrating graph-based and feature-based information as descriptors to predict the melting points of the OMCs but moderate performance. We believe the current approach reduces the time and cost associated with hand-operated data collection and processing, contributing to effective screening of potentially promising ALD precursors and providing crucial information for the advancement of the semiconductor industry.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
ABSTRACT To enhance speed and agility in interpreting physiological quality tests of seeds, The use of algorithms has emerged. This study aimed to identify suitable machine learning models to assist in the precise management of seed lot quality. Soybean lots from two companies were assessed using the Supplied Test Set, Cross-Validation (with 8, 10, and 12 folds), and Percentage Split (with 66% and 70%) methods. Variables analyzed through Tetrazolium tests included vigor, viability, mechanical damage, moisture damage, bed bug damage, and water content. Method performance was determined by Kappa, Precision, and ROC Area metrics. Classification Via Regression and J48 algorithms were employed. The technique utilizing 66% of data for training achieved 93.55% accuracy, with Precision and ROC Area reaching 94.50% for the J48 algorithm. Applying the cross-validation method with 10 folds resulted in 90.22% of correctly classified instances, with a ROC Area outcome like the previous method. Tetrazolium Vigor was the primary attribute used. However, these results are specific to this study's database, and careful planning is necessary to select the most effective application methods.
Facebook
TwitterThis file contains the life cycle inventories (LCIs) developed for an associated journal article. Potential users of the data are referred to the journal article for a full description of the modeling methodology. LCIs were developed for cumene and sodium hydroxide manufacturing using data mining with metadata-based data preprocessing. The inventory data were collected from US EPA's 2012 Chemical Data Reporting database, 2011 National Emissions Inventory, 2011 Toxics Release Inventory, 2011 Electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool, 2011 Discharge Monitoring Report, and the 2011 Biennial Report generated from the RCRAinfo hazardous waste tracking system. The U.S. average cumene gate-to-gate inventories are provided without (baseline) and with process allocation applied using metadata-based filtering. In 2011, there were 8 facilities reporting public production volumes of cumene in the U.S., totaling to 2,609,309,687 kilograms of cumene produced that year. The U.S. average sodium hydroxide gate-to-gate inventories are also provided without (baseline) and with process allocation applied using metadata-based filtering. In 2011, there were 24 facilities reporting public production volumes of sodium hydroxide in the U.S., totaling to 3,878,021,614 kilograms of sodium hydroxide produced that year. Process allocation was only conducted for the top 12 facilities producing sodium hydroxide, which represents 97% of the public production of sodium hydroxide. The data have not been compiled in the formal Federal Commons LCI Template to avoid users interpreting the template to mean the data have been fully reviewed according to LCA standards and can be directly applied to all types of assessments and decision needs without additional review by industry and potential stakeholders. This dataset is associated with the following publication: Meyer, D.E., S. Cashman, and A. Gaglione. Improving the reliability of chemical manufacturing life cycle inventory constructed using secondary data. JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY. Berkeley Electronic Press, Berkeley, CA, USA, 25(1): 20-35, (2021).
Facebook
TwitterMIT Licensehttps://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
License information was derived automatically
This dataset is essentially the metadata from 164 datasets. Each of its lines concerns a dataset from which 22 features have been extracted, which are used to classify each dataset into one of the categories 0-Unmanaged, 2-INV, 3-SI, 4-NOA (DatasetType).
This Dataset consists of 164 Rows. Each row is the metadata of an other dataset. The target column is datasetType which has 4 values indicating the dataset type. These are:
2 - Invoice detail (INV): This dataset type is a special report (usually called Detailed Sales Statement) produced by a Company Accounting or an Enterprise Resource Planning software (ERP). Using a INV-type dataset directly for ARM is extremely convenient for users as it relieves them from the tedious work of transforming data into another more suitable form. INV-type data input typically includes a header but, only two of its attributes are essential for data mining. The first attribute serves as the grouping identifier creating a unique transaction (e.g., Invoice ID, Order Number), while the second attribute contains the items utilized for data mining (e.g., Product Code, Product Name, Product ID).
3 - Sparse Item (SI): This type is widespread in Association Rules Mining (ARM). It involves a header and a fixed number of columns. Each item corresponds to a column. Each row represents a transaction. The typical cell stores a value, usually one character in length, that depicts the presence or absence of the item in the corresponding transaction. The absence character must be identified or declared before the Association Rules Mining process takes place.
4 - Nominal Attributes (NOA): This type is commonly used in Machine Learning and Data Mining tasks. It involves a fixed number of columns. Each column registers nominal/categorical values. The presence of a header row is optional. However, in cases where no header is provided, there is a risk of extracting incorrect rules if similar values exist in different attributes of the dataset. The potential values for each attribute can vary.
0 - Unmanaged for ARM: On the other hand, not all datasets are suitable for extracting useful association rules or frequent item sets. For instance, datasets characterized predominantly by numerical features with arbitrary values, or datasets that involve fragmented or mixed types of data types. For such types of datasets, ARM processing becomes possible only by introducing a data discretization stage which in turn introduces information loss. Such types of datasets are not considered in the present treatise and they are termed (0) Unmanaged in the sequel.
The dataset type is crucial to determine for ARM, and the current dataset is used to classify the dataset's type using a Supervised Machine Learning Model.
There is and another dataset type named 1 - Market Basket List (MBL) where each dataset row is a transaction. A transaction involves a variable number of items. However, due to this characteristic, these datasets can be easily categorized using procedural programming and DoD does not include instances of them. For more details about Dataset Types please refer to article "WebApriori: a web application for association rules mining". https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-49663-0_44
Facebook
TwitterWe put forward a new approach to studying issue definition within the context of policy diffusion. Most studies of policy diffusion---which is the process by which policymaking in one government affects policymaking in other governments---have focused on policy adoptions. We shift the focus to an important but neglected aspect of this process: the issue-definition stage. We use topic models to estimate how policies are framed during this stage and how these frames are predicted by prior policy adoptions. Focusing on smoking restriction in U.S. states, our analysis draws upon an original dataset of over 52,000 paragraphs from newspapers covering 49 states between 1996 and 2013. We find that frames regarding the policy's concrete implications are predicted by prior adoptions in other states, while frames regarding its normative justifications are not. Our approach and findings open the way for a new perspective to studying policy diffusion in many different areas.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Technical notes and documentation on the common data model of the project CONCEPT-DM2.
This publication corresponds to the Common Data Model (CDM) specification of the CONCEPT-DM2 project for the implementation of a federated network analysis of the healthcare pathway of type 2 diabetes.
Aims of the CONCEPT-DM2 project:
General aim: To analyse chronic care effectiveness and efficiency of care pathways in diabetes, assuming the relevance of care pathways as independent factors of health outcomes using data from real life world (RWD) from five Spanish Regional Health Systems.
Main specific aims:
Study Design: It is a population-based retrospective observational study centered on all T2D patients diagnosed in five Regional Health Services within the Spanish National Health Service. We will include all the contacts of these patients with the health services using the electronic medical record systems including Primary Care data, Specialized Care data, Hospitalizations, Urgent Care data, Pharmacy Claims, and also other registers such as the mortality and the population register.
Cohort definition: All patients with code of Type 2 Diabetes in the clinical health records
Files included in this publication:
Facebook
TwitterInternational Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems Impact Factor 2024-2025 - ResearchHelpDesk - The International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems is an international peer reviewed journal and the official publication of the European Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technologies (EUSFLAT). The journal publishes original research on all aspects of applied computational intelligence, especially targeting papers demonstrating the use of techniques and methods originating from computational intelligence theory. This is an open access journal, i.e. all articles are immediately and permanently free to read, download, copy & distribute. The journal is published under the CC BY-NC 4.0 user license which defines the permitted 3rd-party reuse of its articles. Aims & Scope The International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems publishes original research on all aspects of applied computational intelligence, especially targeting papers demonstrating the use of techniques and methods originating from computational intelligence theory. The core theories of computational intelligence are fuzzy logic, neural networks, evolutionary computation and probabilistic reasoning. The journal publishes only articles related to the use of computational intelligence and broadly covers the following topics: Autonomous reasoning Bio-informatics Cloud computing Condition monitoring Data science Data mining Data visualization Decision support systems Fault diagnosis Intelligent information retrieval Human-machine interaction and interfaces Image processing Internet and networks Noise analysis Pattern recognition Prediction systems Power (nuclear) safety systems Process and system control Real-time systems Risk analysis and safety-related issues Robotics Signal and image processing IoT and smart environments Systems integration System control System modelling and optimization Telecommunications Time series prediction Warning systems Virtual reality Web intelligence Deep learning
Facebook
TwitterFull title: Mining Distance-Based Outliers in Near Linear Time with Randomization and a Simple Pruning Rule Abstract: Defining outliers by their distance to neighboring examples is a popular approach to finding unusual examples in a data set. Recently, much work has been conducted with the goal of finding fast algorithms for this task. We show that a simple nested loop algorithm that in the worst case is quadratic can give near linear time performance when the data is in random order and a simple pruning rule is used. We test our algorithm on real high-dimensional data sets with millions of examples and show that the near linear scaling holds over several orders of magnitude. Our average case analysis suggests that much of the efficiency is because the time to process non-outliers, which are the majority of examples, does not depend on the size of the data set.
Facebook
TwitterU.S. Government Workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
License information was derived automatically
Anomaly detection is a process of identifying items, events or observations, which do not conform to an expected pattern in a dataset or time series. Current and future missions and our research communities challenge us to rapidly identify features and anomalies in complex and voluminous observations to further science and improve decision support. Given this data intensive reality, we propose to develop an anomaly detection system, called OceanXtremes, powered by an intelligent, elastic Cloud-based analytic service backend that enables execution of domain-specific, multi-scale anomaly and feature detection algorithms across the entire archive of ocean science datasets. A parallel analytics engine will be developed as the key computational and data-mining core of OceanXtreams' backend processing. This analytic engine will demonstrate three new technology ideas to provide rapid turn around on climatology computation and anomaly detection: 1. An adaption of the Hadoop/MapReduce framework for parallel data mining of science datasets, typically large 3 or 4 dimensional arrays packaged in NetCDF and HDF. 2. An algorithm profiling service to efficiently and cost-effectively scale up hybrid Cloud computing resources based on the needs of scheduled jobs (CPU, memory, network, and bursting from a private Cloud computing cluster to public cloud provider like Amazon Cloud services). 3. An extension to industry-standard search solutions (OpenSearch and Faceted search) to provide support for shared discovery and exploration of ocean phenomena and anomalies, along with unexpected correlations between key measured variables. We will use a hybrid Cloud compute cluster (private Eucalyptus on-premise at JPL with bursting to Amazon Web Services) as the operational backend. The key idea is that the parallel data-mining operations will be run 'near' the ocean data archives (a local 'network' hop) so that we can efficiently access the thousands of (say, daily) files making up a three decade time-series, and then cache key variables and pre-computed climatologies in a high-performance parallel database. OceanXtremes will be equipped with both web portal and web service interfaces for users and applications/systems to register and retrieve oceanographic anomalies data. By leveraging technology such as Datacasting (Bingham, et.al, 2007), users can also subscribe to anomaly or 'event' types of their interest and have newly computed anomaly metrics and other information delivered to them by metadata feeds packaged in standard Rich Site Summary (RSS) format. Upon receiving new feed entries, users can examine the metrics and download relevant variables, by simply clicking on a link, to begin further analyzing the event. The OceanXtremes web portal will allow users to define their own anomaly or feature types where continuous backend processing will be scheduled to populate the new user-defined anomaly type by executing the chosen data mining algorithm (i.e. differences from climatology or gradients above a specified threshold). Metadata on the identified anomalies will be cataloged including temporal and geospatial profiles, key physical metrics, related observational artifacts and other relevant metadata to facilitate discovery, extraction, and visualization. Products created by the anomaly detection algorithm will be made explorable and subsettable using Webification (Huang, et.al, 2014) and OPeNDAP (http://opendap.org) technologies. Using this platform scientists can efficiently search for anomalies or ocean phenomena, compute data metrics for events or over time-series of ocean variables, and efficiently find and access all of the data relevant to their study (and then download only that data).
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The presented data is the input big data structured information considering suppliers of ICT sector in MAMUT Corporations. The big data input is structured from 20 business areas and 479 suppliers. The big data decision matrix is based on 7 criteria which have been identified by library research and expert comments and the matrix completed by expert comments. Other files are the detailed results of the CLUS-MCDA algorithm process.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Abstract: Process mining leverages execution traces within an organisation's IT systems to gain insights into its processes. Despite being a mature discipline in academia and industry, setting up process mining pipelines is still a complex task and involves programming, manual steps, and considerations of privacy and intellectual property.
This paper introduces a platform based on a distributed architecture that helps define, deploy, and execute process mining pipelines across organisations. The requirements for this distributed architecture and platform are derived from a set of process mining scenarios, whose relevance is validated through a survey.
Furthermore, this paper introduces a prototype for an initial version of the platform, demonstrating feasibility and supporting the specified requirements. This development is a major step in advancing process mining, offering simpler and more efficient ways of implementing and managing complex process mining pipelines on a larger scale.
Description: This dataset presents the support for non-functional requirements identified in the paper "A Distributed Architecture for Process Mining: Controlled Sharing of Data and Algorithms" by existing process mining platforms.
Legend: Green cells indicate complete fulfilment. Yellow indicates partial fulfilment. Blue cells indicate uncertain fulfilment. Red indicates no fulfilmnet.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Results obtained from implementing the search protocol devised for the literature survey "Conversational Systems for AI-Augmented Business Process Management".
The dataset comprises four spreadsheets, each corresponding to one of the four BPM areas identified in the paper, namely:
Descriptive Process Analytics;
Predictive Process Analytics;
Prescriptive Process Optimization;
Augmented Process Execution.
Each spreadsheet consists of multiple sheets:
The first four sheets document the papers collected from each data source (Google Scholar, Scopus, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore) by applying the search strings defined in the paper.
"All" reports all the papers obtained in the search.
"All(-duplicates)" lists all publications, excluding duplicates.
"Inclusion" applies the inclusion criteria defined in the paper to select the works considered in this survey.
"Final" comprises the selected papers, representing the outcomes of the search protocol's application.
"Results" provides statistical insights into the application of the search protocol for the specific BPM area under analysis."
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus)
April 2020 by Neslihan Suzen, PhD student at the University of Leicester (ns433@leicester.ac.uk) Supervised by Prof Alexander Gorban and Dr Evgeny MirkesThe data are extracted from the Web of Science [1]. You may not copy or distribute these data in whole or in part without the written consent of Clarivate Analytics.[Version 2] A further cleaning is applied in Data Processing for LSC Abstracts in Version 1*. Details of cleaning procedure are explained in Step 6.* Suzen, Neslihan (2019): LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus). figshare. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.25392/leicester.data.9449639.v1.Getting StartedThis text provides the information on the LSC (Leicester Scientific Corpus) and pre-processing steps on abstracts, and describes the structure of files to organise the corpus. This corpus is created to be used in future work on the quantification of the meaning of research texts and make it available for use in Natural Language Processing projects.LSC is a collection of abstracts of articles and proceeding papers published in 2014, and indexed by the Web of Science (WoS) database [1]. The corpus contains only documents in English. Each document in the corpus contains the following parts:1. Authors: The list of authors of the paper2. Title: The title of the paper 3. Abstract: The abstract of the paper 4. Categories: One or more category from the list of categories [2]. Full list of categories is presented in file ‘List_of _Categories.txt’. 5. Research Areas: One or more research area from the list of research areas [3]. Full list of research areas is presented in file ‘List_of_Research_Areas.txt’. 6. Total Times cited: The number of times the paper was cited by other items from all databases within Web of Science platform [4] 7. Times cited in Core Collection: The total number of times the paper was cited by other papers within the WoS Core Collection [4]The corpus was collected in July 2018 online and contains the number of citations from publication date to July 2018. We describe a document as the collection of information (about a paper) listed above. The total number of documents in LSC is 1,673,350.Data ProcessingStep 1: Downloading of the Data Online
The dataset is collected manually by exporting documents as Tab-delimitated files online. All documents are available online.Step 2: Importing the Dataset to R
The LSC was collected as TXT files. All documents are extracted to R.Step 3: Cleaning the Data from Documents with Empty Abstract or without CategoryAs our research is based on the analysis of abstracts and categories, all documents with empty abstracts and documents without categories are removed.Step 4: Identification and Correction of Concatenate Words in AbstractsEspecially medicine-related publications use ‘structured abstracts’. Such type of abstracts are divided into sections with distinct headings such as introduction, aim, objective, method, result, conclusion etc. Used tool for extracting abstracts leads concatenate words of section headings with the first word of the section. For instance, we observe words such as ConclusionHigher and ConclusionsRT etc. The detection and identification of such words is done by sampling of medicine-related publications with human intervention. Detected concatenate words are split into two words. For instance, the word ‘ConclusionHigher’ is split into ‘Conclusion’ and ‘Higher’.The section headings in such abstracts are listed below:
Background Method(s) Design Theoretical Measurement(s) Location Aim(s) Methodology Process Abstract Population Approach Objective(s) Purpose(s) Subject(s) Introduction Implication(s) Patient(s) Procedure(s) Hypothesis Measure(s) Setting(s) Limitation(s) Discussion Conclusion(s) Result(s) Finding(s) Material (s) Rationale(s) Implications for health and nursing policyStep 5: Extracting (Sub-setting) the Data Based on Lengths of AbstractsAfter correction, the lengths of abstracts are calculated. ‘Length’ indicates the total number of words in the text, calculated by the same rule as for Microsoft Word ‘word count’ [5].According to APA style manual [6], an abstract should contain between 150 to 250 words. In LSC, we decided to limit length of abstracts from 30 to 500 words in order to study documents with abstracts of typical length ranges and to avoid the effect of the length to the analysis.
Step 6: [Version 2] Cleaning Copyright Notices, Permission polices, Journal Names and Conference Names from LSC Abstracts in Version 1Publications can include a footer of copyright notice, permission policy, journal name, licence, author’s right or conference name below the text of abstract by conferences and journals. Used tool for extracting and processing abstracts in WoS database leads to attached such footers to the text. For example, our casual observation yields that copyright notices such as ‘Published by Elsevier ltd.’ is placed in many texts. To avoid abnormal appearances of words in further analysis of words such as bias in frequency calculation, we performed a cleaning procedure on such sentences and phrases in abstracts of LSC version 1. We removed copyright notices, names of conferences, names of journals, authors’ rights, licenses and permission policies identified by sampling of abstracts.Step 7: [Version 2] Re-extracting (Sub-setting) the Data Based on Lengths of AbstractsThe cleaning procedure described in previous step leaded to some abstracts having less than our minimum length criteria (30 words). 474 texts were removed.Step 8: Saving the Dataset into CSV FormatDocuments are saved into 34 CSV files. In CSV files, the information is organised with one record on each line and parts of abstract, title, list of authors, list of categories, list of research areas, and times cited is recorded in fields.To access the LSC for research purposes, please email to ns433@le.ac.uk.References[1]Web of Science. (15 July). Available: https://apps.webofknowledge.com/ [2]WoS Subject Categories. Available: https://images.webofknowledge.com/WOKRS56B5/help/WOS/hp_subject_category_terms_tasca.html [3]Research Areas in WoS. Available: https://images.webofknowledge.com/images/help/WOS/hp_research_areas_easca.html [4]Times Cited in WoS Core Collection. (15 July). Available: https://support.clarivate.com/ScientificandAcademicResearch/s/article/Web-of-Science-Times-Cited-accessibility-and-variation?language=en_US [5]Word Count. Available: https://support.office.com/en-us/article/show-word-count-3c9e6a11-a04d-43b4-977c-563a0e0d5da3 [6]A. P. Association, Publication manual. American Psychological Association Washington, DC, 1983.