5 views

Uploaded by Informatika Universitas Malikussaleh

https://www.scribd.com/user/389067569/Informatika-Universitas-Malikussaleh
https://scholar.google.co.id/citations?user=5wetrXMAAAAJ&hl=id&oi=ao

- Emotional pattern recognition using machine learning
- a6305 Neural Network
- Idiomaticity
- Content - Giang
- Sslc English II Paper Study Material
- AMARABAC_3-6_139-147
- 00474 Nataša Zavrtanik
- idioms n phrases
- Prepositions - Quicktips
- 3248_w10_er
- check_your_english_vocabulary_for_human_resources.pdf
- Quiz(14)Criteria for judging
- 69.neural network (IEEE format).doc
- Hinese Language Usage
- Michiko Diss
- A Survey of Text Classification and Clustering Issues in Data Mining
- for self stydy
- Applications of Artificial Neural Networks in Cancer Prediction
- IABMAS2010-Pozzi Zonta Weng Chen
- Automatic Map Feature Extraction Using Artificial Neural Networks

You are on page 1of 4

Pavel Pecina

Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics

Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic

pecina@ufal.mff.cuni.cz

Abstract

This paper describes our participation in the MWE 2008 evaluation campaign focused on ranking MWE candidates. Our ranking system

employed 55 association measures combined by standard statistical-classiﬁcation methods modiﬁed to provide scores for ranking. Our

results were crossvalidated and compared by Mean Average Precision. In most of the experiments we observed signiﬁcant performance

improvement achieved by methods combining multiple association measures.

Four gold standard data sets were provided for the MWE 3.1. Data Description

2008 shared task. The goal was to re-rank each list such This data set consits of 1 252 German collocation candi-

that the “best” candidates are concentrated at the top of the dates randomly sampled from the 8 546 different adjective-

list1 . Our experiments were carried out only on three data noun pairs (attributive prenominal adjectives only) occur-

sets – those provided with corpus frequency data by the ring at least 20 times in the Frankfurter Rundschau corpus

shared task organizers: German Adj-N collocation candi- (FR, 1994). The collocation candidates were lemmatized

dates, German PP-Verb collocation candidates, and Czech with the IMSLex morphology (Lezius et al., 2000), pre-

dependency bigrams from the Prague Dependency Tree- processed with the partial parser YAC (Kermes, 2003) for

bank. For each set of experiments we present the best per- data extraction, and annotated by professional lexicogra-

forming association measure (AM) and results of our own phers with the following categories:

system based on combination of multiple association mea-

sures (AMs). 1. true lexical collocations, other multiword expressions

2. customary and frequent combination, often part of col-

2. System Overview locational pattern

3. common expression, but no idiomatic properties

In our system which was already described in (Pecina

4. unclear / boundary cases

and Schlesinger, 2006) and (Pecina, 2005), each colloca- 5. not collocational, free combinations

tion candidate xi is described by the feature vector xi = 6. lemmatization errors corpus-speciﬁc combinations

(x1i , . . . , x55

i )T consisting of 55 association scores from Ta-

ble 1 computed from the corpus frequency data (provided 3.2. Experiments and Results

by the shared task organizers) and assigned a label yi ∈ Frequency counts were provided for 1 213 collocation can-

{0, 1} which indicates whether the bigram is considered as didates from this data set. We performed two sets of exper-

true positive (y = 1) or not (y = 0). A part of the data is iments on them. First, only the categories 1–2 were consid-

then used to train standard statistical-classiﬁcation models ered true positives. There was a total of 511 such cases and

to predict the labels. These methods are modiﬁed so they do thus the baseline precision was quite high (42.12%). The

not produce 0–1 classiﬁcation but rather a score that can be highest MAP of 62.88% achieved by Piatersky–Shapiro co-

used (similarly as for association measures) for ranking the efﬁcient (51) was not outperformed by any of the combina-

collocation candidates (Pecina and Schlesinger, 2006). The tion method.

following statistical-classiﬁcation methods were used in ex- In the second set of experiments, the true positives com-

periments described in this paper: Linear Logistic Regres- prised categories 1–2–3 (total of 628 items). The baseline

sion (GLM), Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA), Neural precision was as high as 51.78%. The best association mea-

Networks with 1 and 5 units in the hidden layer (NNet.1, sure was again Piatersky–Shapiro coefﬁcient (51) but it was

NNet.5). slightly outperformed by most of the combination meth-

For evaluation we followed a similar procedure as in our ods. The best one was based on LDA and achieved MAP of

previous work (Pecina and Schlesinger, 2006). Before each 70.77%. See detailed results in Table 2.

set of experiments every data set was split into seven strat-

1–2 1–2–3

iﬁed folds each containing the same ratio of true positives.

Average precision (corresponding to the area under the Baseline 42.12 51.78

Best AM 62.88 (51) 69.14 (51)

precision-recall curve) was estimated for each data fold and

GLM 60.88 70.62

its mean was used as the main evaluation measure (Mean

LDA 61.30 70.77

Average Precision - MAP). The methods combining multi- NNet.1 60.52 70.38

ple association measures used 6 data folds for training and NNet.5 59.87 70.16

one for testing (7-fold crossvalidation).

Table 2: MAP results of ranking German Adj-N collocation

1 http://multiword.sf.net/mwe2008/ candidates

# Name Formula # Name Formula

(a+b)(a+c)(d+b)(d+c)

2. Conditional probability P(y|x) 32. Pearson √ ad−bc

(a+b)(a+c)(d+b)(d+c)

√

3. Reverse conditional prob. P(x|y) 33. Baroni-Urbani a+ ad√

a+b+c+ ad

P(xy)

4. Pointwise mutual inform. log P(x∗)P(∗y) 34. Braun-Blanquet a

max(a+b,a+c)

P(xy)2

5. Mutual dependency (MD) log P(x∗)P(∗y) 35. Simpson a

min(a+b,a+c)

P(xy)2

6. Log frequency biased MD log P(x∗)P(∗y)

+ log P(xy) 36. Michael

4(ad−bc)

(a+d)2 +(b+c)2

2 f (xy)

7. Normalized expectation f (x∗)+ f (∗y) 37. Mountford 2a

2bc+ab+ac

2 f (xy)

8. Mutual expectation f (x∗)+ f (∗y)

· P(xy) 38. Fager √ a

− 21 max(b, c)

(a+b)(a+c)

P(xy)2 √

9. Salience log P(x∗)P(∗y) · log f (xy)

39. Unigram subtuples log ad

bc − 3.29 1a + b1 + 1c + d1

( f − fˆ )2

10. Pearson’s χ2 test ∑i, j i j fˆ i j min(b,c)+a

ij 40. U cost log(1 + max(b,c)+a )

f (x∗)! f (x̄∗)! f (∗y)! f (∗ȳ)!

11. Fisher’s exact test min(b,c) − 1

N! f (xy)! f (xȳ)! f (x̄y)! f (x̄ȳ)! 41. S cost log(1 + a+1 )

2

f (xy)− fˆ(xy)

12. t test √

f (xy)(1−( f (xy)/N)) 42. R cost a

log(1 + a+b ) · log(1 + a+c

a

)

ˆ

√ f (xy)− f (xy) √

13. z score 43. T combined cost U ×S×R

fˆ(xy)(1−( fˆ(xy)/N))

fˆ(xy)− f (xy) log fˆ(xy)+log f (xy)!

14. Poisson signiﬁcance measure log N 44. Phi √ P(xy)−P(x∗)P(∗y)

P(x∗)P(∗y)(1−P(x∗))(1−P(∗y))

fi j

15. Log likelihood ratio −2 ∑i, j fi j log 45. Kappa

P(xy)+P(x̄ȳ)−P(x∗)P(∗y)−P(x̄∗)P(∗ȳ)

fˆi j 1−P(x∗)P(∗y)−P(x̄∗)P(∗ȳ)

log fi2j

16. Squared log likelihood ratio −2 ∑i, j 46. J measure max[P(xy) log

P(y|x)

+ P(xȳ) log

P(ȳ|x)

,

fˆi j P(∗y) P(∗ȳ)

a P(x|y) P(x̄|y)

17. Russel-Rao a+b+c+d P(xy) log P(x∗)

+ P(x̄y) log P(x̄∗)

]

a+d

18. Sokal-Michiner a+b+c+d 47. Gini index max[P(x∗)(P(y|x)2 + P(ȳ|x)2 ) − P(∗y)2

a+d

19. Rogers-Tanimoto a+2b+2c+d ¯

+P(x∗)(P(y|x̄)2 + P(ȳ|x̄)2 ) − P(∗ȳ)2 ,

(a+d)−(b+c)

20. Hamann a+b+c+d P(∗y)(P(x|y)2 + P(x̄|y)2 ) − P(x∗)2

b+c

21. Third Sokal-Sneath a+d +P(∗ȳ)(P(x|ȳ)2 + P(x̄|ȳ)2 ) − P(x̄∗)2 ]

a

22. Jaccard a+b+c 48. Conﬁdence max[P(y|x), P(x|y)]

a NP(xy)+1 NP(xy)+1

23. First Kulczynsky b+c 49. Laplace max[ NP(x∗)+2 , NP(∗y)+2 ]

a P(x∗)P(∗y) P(x̄∗)P(∗y)

24. Second Sokal-Sneath a+2(b+c) 50. Conviction max[ P(xȳ)

, P(x̄y) ]

1 a a

25. Second Kulczynski 2 ( a+b + a+c ) 51. Piatersky-Shapiro P(xy) − P(x∗)P(∗y)

1 a a d d P(y|x)−P(∗y) P(x|y)−P(x∗)

26. Fourth Sokal-Sneath 4 ( a+b + a+c + d+b + d+c ) 52. Certainity factor max[ 1−P(∗y)

, 1−P(x∗) ]

ad

27. Odds ratio bc 53. Added value (AV) max[P(y|x) − P(∗y), P(x|y) − P(x∗)]

√ √

P(xy)+P(x̄ȳ)

28. Yulle’s ω √ad−√bc 54. Collective strength P(x∗)P(y)+P(x̄∗)P(∗y)

·

ad+ bc

ad−bc 1−P(x∗)P(∗y)−P(x̄∗)P(∗y)

29. Yulle’s Q ad+bc 1−P(xy)−P(x̄ȳ)

√

30. Driver-Kroeber √ a

55. Klosgen P(xy) · AV

(a+b)(a+c)

a = f (xy) b = f (xȳ) f (x∗) A contingency table contains observed frequencies and marginal frequencies for a bi-

gram xy; w̄ stands for any word except w; ∗ stands for any word; N is a total number

c = f (x̄y) d = f (x̄ȳ) f (x̄∗)

of bigrams. The table cells are sometimes referred to as fij . Statistical tests of inde-

f (∗y) f (∗ȳ) N pendence work with contingency tables of expected frequencies fˆ(xy) = f (x∗) f (∗y)/N .

4. German PP-Verb Collocation Candidates Figurative Expressions

4.1. Data Description Ranking ﬁgurative expressions seems more difﬁcult. The

best individual association measure on all data is again

This data set comprises 21 796 German combinations of a

Conﬁdence measure with MAP of only 14.98%, although

prepositional phrase (PP) and a governing verb extracted

the baseline precision is a little bit higher then in the case of

from the Frankfurter Rundschau corpus (FR, 1994) and

support-verb constructions (3.16%). The best combination

used in a number of experiments, e.g. (Krenn, 2000). PPs

of multiple AMs is obtained by Logistic Regression (GLM)

are represented by combination of a preposition and a nom-

with MAP equal to 19.22%. Results for the candidates

inal head. Both the nominal head and the verb were lemma-

occurring at least 30 times (baseline precision 5.70%) are

tized using the IMSLex morphology (Lezius et al., 2000)

higher: the best AM (Piatersky-Shapiro coefﬁcient) with

and processed by the partial parser YAC (Kermes, 2003).

MAP 21.04% and LDA with MAP 23.32%. In case of PP

See (Evert, 2004) for details of the extraction procedure.

combinations with light verbs, the winning individual AM

The data were manually annotated as lexical collocations or

is t test (12) with MAP of 23.65% and the best combination

non-collocational by Brigitte Krenn (Krenn, 2000). In addi-

method is Neural Network (5 units) with 25.86%. Details

tion, distinction was made between two subtypes of lexical

are depicted in Table 4.

collocations: support-verb constructions (FVG), and ﬁgu-

rative expressions (Figur). all in.fr30 light.v

4.2. Experiments and Results Baseline 3.16 5.70 4.56

Best AM 14.98 (48) 21.04 (51) 23.65 (12)

On this data we carried out several series of experiments. GLM 19.22 15.28 10.46

First, we focused on the support-verb constructions and ﬁg- LDA 18.34 23.32 24.88

urative expressions separately, then we attempted to extract NNet.1 19.05 22.01 24.30

all of them without making this distinction. Frequency data NNet.5 18.26 22.73 25.86

were provided for a total of 18 649 collocation candidates.

The main experiments were performed on all of them. Fur- Table 4: MAP results of ranking German PP-Verb ﬁgura-

ther, as suggested by the shared task organizers, we re- tive expression candidates.

stricted ourselves to a subset of 4 908 candidate pairs that

occur at least 30 times in the Frankfurter Rundschau corpus Support-Verb Constructions and Figurative Expressions

(in.fr30). Similarly, additional experiments were restricted The last set of experiments performed on the German PP-

to candidate pairs containing one of 16 typical light verbs. Verb data aimed at ranking both support-verb constructions

This was motivated by assumption that ﬁltering based on and ﬁgurative expressions without making any distinction

this condition should signiﬁcantly improve the performance between these two types of collocations. The results are

of association measures. After applying this ﬁlter the re- shown in Table 5 and are not very surprising. The best in-

sulting set contained 6 272 collocation candidates. dividual AM on all the candidates as well as on the subset

of the frequent ones was Piatersky-Shapiro coefﬁcient with

Support-Verb Constructions MAP 31.17% and 43.85%, respectively. Poisson signiﬁ-

The baseline precision for ranking only the support-verb cance measure (14) performed best on the candidates con-

constructions in all the data is as low as 2.91%, the best taining light verbs (63.59%). The best combination method

MAP (18.26%) was achieved by Conﬁdence measure. Ad- were Neural Networks with 1 or 5 units. The most sub-

ditional substantial improvement was achieved by all com- stantial performance improvement obtained by combining

bination methods. The best score (30.77%) was obtained by multiple AMs was observed on the set of all candidates (no

Neural Network (1 unit). When focused on the candidates ﬁltering applied).

occurring at least 30 times (baseline precision 5.75%), the

best individual association measure appeared to be again all in.fr30 light.v

Conﬁdence measure with MAP 28.48%. The best combi- Baseline 6.07 11.45 11.81

nation method was then Neural Network with 5 units: MAP Best AM 31.17 (48) 43.85 (48) 63.59 (14)

43.40%. The best performing individual association mea- GLM 44.66 47.81 65.37

sure on light verb data was Poisson signiﬁcance measure LDA 41.20 57.77 65.54

(14) with MAP as high as 43.97% (baseline 7.25%). The NNet.1 44.71 60.59 65.10

performance gain achieved by the best combination method NNet.5 44.77 59.59 66.06

was not, however, so signiﬁcant (45.08%, LDA). Details

Table 5: MAP results of ranking German PP-Verb candi-

are shown in Table 3.

dates of both support-verb constructions and ﬁgurative ex-

all in.fr30 light.v pressions.

Baseline 2.91 5.75 7.25

Best AM 18.26 (48) 28.48 (48) 43.97 (14) 5. Czech PDT Bigrams

GLM 28.40 26.59 41.25 5.1. Data Description

LDA 28.38 40.44 45.08

NNet.1 30.77 42.42 44.98 The PDT data consist of notated list of 12 233 normalized

NNet.5 30.49 43.40 44.23 dependency bigrams occurring in the manually annotated

Prague Dependency Treebank (2.0, 2006) more than ﬁve

Table 3: MAP results of ranking German PP-Verb support- times and having part-of-speech patterns that can possibly

verb construction candidates.

form a collocation. Every bigram is assigned to one of the Data Set Var Baseline Best AM Best CM +%

six categories described below by three annotators. Only GR Adj-N 1-2 42.40 62.88 61.30 -2.51

the bigrams that all annotators agreed to be collocations 1-2-3 51.74 69.14 70.77 2.36

(of any type, categories 1–5) are considered true positives. GR PP-V FVG all 2.89 18.26 30.77 68.51

The entire set contains 2 572 such items. See (Pecina and in.fr30 5.71 28.48 43.40 52.39

Schlesinger, 2006) for details. light.v 7.26 43.97 45.08 2.52

GR PP-V Figur all 3.15 14.98 19.22 28.30

0. non-collocations in.fr30 5.71 21.04 23.32 10.84

1. stock phrases, frequent unpredictable usages light.v 4.47 23.65 25.86 9.34

2. names of persons, organizations, geographical loca- GR PP-V all 6.05 31.17 44.77 43.63

tions, and other entities in.fr30 11.43 43.85 60.59 38.18

3. support verb constructions light.v 11.73 63.59 66.06 3.88

4. technical terms CZ PDT Bigram 21.01 65.63 70.31 7.13

5. idiomatic expressions +POS 21.01 65.63 79.51 21.15

5.2. Experiments and Results Table 7: Summary of the results obtained on all data sets

The baseline precision on this data is 21.02%. In our exper- and their variants. The last two columns refer to the best

iments, the best performing individual association measure method combining multiple association measures and the

was Unigram subtuple measure (39) with MAP of 65.63%. corresponding relative improvement compared to the best

The best method combining all AMs was Neural Network individual association measure. The last row refers to the

(5 units) with MAP equal to 70.31%. After introducing a experiment using combination of association measures and

new (categorial) variable indicating POS patterns of the col- information about POS patterns.

location candidates and adding it to the combination meth-

ods, the performance increased up to 79.51% (in case of the

best method – Neural Network with 5 units) . 7. References

PDT 2.0. 2006. http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/.

AMs AMs+POS Stefan Evert. 2004. The Statistics of Word Cooccur-

Baseline 21.01 rences: Word Pairs and Collocations. Ph.D. thesis, Univ.

Best AM 65.63 (39) of Stuttgart.

GLM 67.21 77.27 1994. The FR corpus is part of the ECI Multi-

LDA 67.23 75.83 lingual Corpus I distributed by ELSNET. See

NNet.1 67.34 77.76

http://www.elsnet.org/eci.html for more information and

NNet.5 70.31 79.51

licensing conditions.

Table 6: MAP results of ranking Czech PDT collocation Hannah Kermes. 2003. Off-line (and On-line) Text Analy-

candidates. The second column refers to experiments using sis for Computational Lexicography. Ph.D. thesis, IMS,

combination of association measures and information about University of Stuttgart.

POS patterns. Brigitte Krenn. 2000. The Usual Suspects: Data-Oriented

Models for Identiﬁcation and Representation of Lexical

6. Conclusions Collocations. Ph.D. thesis, Saarland University.

Wolfgang Lezius, Stefanie Dipper, and Arne Fitschen.

The overview of the best results achieved by individual

2000. IMSLex - representing morphological and syntac-

AMs and by combination methods on all the data sets (and

tical information in a relational database. In U. Heid, S.

their variants) is shown in Table 7. With only one exception

Evert, E. Lehmann, and C. Rohrer (eds.), Proceedings

the combination methods signiﬁcantly improved ranking of

of the 9th EURALEX International Congress, Stuttgart,

collocation candidates on all data sets. Our results showed

Germany.

that different measures give different results for different

Pavel Pecina and Pavel Schlesinger. 2006. Combin-

tasks (data). It is not possible to recommend “the best

ing association measures for collocation extraction. In

general association measure” for ranking collocation can-

Proceedings of the 21th International Conference on

didates. Instead, we suggest to use the proposed machine

Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of

learning approach and let the classiﬁcation methods do the

the Association for Computational Linguistics (COL-

job. Although it seems that Neural Network is probably the

ING/ACL 2006), Sydney, Australia.

most suitable method for this task, we treat all the combi-

Pavel Pecina. 2005. An extensive empirical study of col-

nation methods as equally good. We only recommend to

location extraction methods. In Proceedings of the ACL

use models that are ﬁtted properly. Further, we also suggest

2005 Student Research Workshop, Ann Arbor, USA.

to reduce the number of AMs employed in the combination

methods by removing those that are redundant or do not

help the prediction (see Pecina and Schlesinger (2006) for

details.

Acknowledgments

This work has been supported by the Ministry of Education

of the Czech Republic, projects MSM 0021620838.

- Emotional pattern recognition using machine learningUploaded byPierrick Barreau
- a6305 Neural NetworkUploaded byhari0118
- IdiomaticityUploaded byIrina Bicescu
- Content - GiangUploaded byKim Anh
- Sslc English II Paper Study MaterialUploaded bySundar Jeyaprakash
- AMARABAC_3-6_139-147Uploaded byGalal Nadim
- 00474 Nataša ZavrtanikUploaded byMuhd Shafiq Aiman
- idioms n phrasesUploaded bybalaboina
- Prepositions - QuicktipsUploaded bywitcher2
- 3248_w10_erUploaded bymstudy123456
- check_your_english_vocabulary_for_human_resources.pdfUploaded bymin
- Quiz(14)Criteria for judgingUploaded byJemmy Prempeh
- 69.neural network (IEEE format).docUploaded bySuganya Periasamy
- Hinese Language UsageUploaded byTratamenterapii-manuale Fizioterapie
- Michiko DissUploaded bymonkeymonica
- A Survey of Text Classification and Clustering Issues in Data MiningUploaded byInternational Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
- for self stydyUploaded byRishi Jha
- Applications of Artificial Neural Networks in Cancer PredictionUploaded byIRJET Journal
- IABMAS2010-Pozzi Zonta Weng ChenUploaded byteopozz
- Automatic Map Feature Extraction Using Artificial Neural NetworksUploaded bysandeep
- 262Uploaded bysdrenjith
- Literature ReviewUploaded byaquaomz
- Question Bank of MetrologyUploaded bymetrologyquestion
- Interactive News Feed Extraction System-2Uploaded byIAEME Publication
- 01lewisaUploaded byImad Aghila
- Small Neural Nets LabUploaded byAli Ahmad
- Application of Artificial Intelligence to Characterize Naturally Fractured ReservoirsUploaded bymohamadi42
- Once is Not Enough_ The Case for Using an Iterative Approach to Choosing and Applying Selection Criteria in Discovery « The Electronic Discovery Reference ModelUploaded byChuck Rothman
- Mayer August, Wiesbauer Gerald and Spitzlinger Markus- Applications of Hopfield NetworksUploaded byAsvcxv
- ApAPPLICATION OF ADAPTIVE NEURO FUZZY INFERENCE SYSTEM IN THE PROCESS OF TRANSPORTATION SUPPORTjor Article AnfisUploaded byDragan Pamučar

- Real-time Mobile Food Recognition SystemUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- Shaoyu Lu, Sina Lin, Beibei Wang, Recognition and Classification of Fast Food ImagesUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- 3 CurrencyUploaded bySajith Sachu
- Ranking Fuzzy Numbers Based on Sokal and Sneath IndexUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- Implementation of Some Similarity Coefficients in Conjunction With Multiple Upgma and Neighbor-joining Algorithms for Enhancing Phylogenetic TreesUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- Measuring String SimilarityUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- Similarity Measures for Fingerprint MatchingUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- Fake Currency Detection Using Image ProcessingUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- Measuring Calories and Nutrition From Food ImageUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- ipi10157Uploaded byRiski Yufensius
- Measuring the Structural Similarity Between Source Code EntitiesUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- 19-1-128-4-10-20170718Uploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- Indian Currency Recognition and Verification Using Image ProcessingUploaded byIRJET Journal
- IJISET_V1_I10_22 Detection of Fake Currency Using Image ProcessingUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- Image Recognition of 85 Food Categories by Feature FusionUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- Image Manipulation Detection With Binary Similarity MeasuresUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- Computation of Similarity Measures Sequential Data Using Generalized Suffix TreesUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- JDS-192Uploaded byamrajee
- Combined Use of Association Rules Mining and Clustering Methods to Find Relevant Links Between Binary Rare Attributes in a Large Data SetUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- - Thesis Revisi Sidang IIIUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- A Model for Spectra-based Software DiagnosisUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- 3 Distance, SimilarityUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- A Survey of Binary Similarity and Distance MeasuresUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- Measuring the Structural Similarity Between Source Code EntitiesUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- 37-masalah-populer1.pdfUploaded byAditya Yudha Fiandra
- Comparison of Maize Similarity and Dissimilarity Genetic Coefficients Based on Microsatellite MarkersUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- 77 Tanya Jawab ShalatUploaded byaldiansyahrauf
- Image Steganalysis With Binary Similarity MeasuresUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh
- 2423-7228-1-PBUploaded byInformatika Universitas Malikussaleh

- Three Tank System-1Uploaded byj udayasekhar
- 1992 - A Method for Registration of 3-D Shapes - ICP - OKUploaded byluongxuandan
- BTTJv5n1Uploaded byGlenn Allen Torshizi
- 3. E-government and ManagerialismUploaded byLucila
- 08.ACLs and Route SummarizationUploaded byasegunlolu
- 181604_DAA(1)Uploaded byJigar Thakkar
- 58280841-Final-Project.docUploaded byNitinAgnihotri
- Ansys Structural Analysis GuideUploaded byWoohyuck Choi
- WirtgenGroup WITOS eUploaded byLucky Chopra
- Database & Database UsersUploaded byalfedds
- 3 Router Igrp Configuration LabUploaded bySiddhant Singal
- Assignment 1Uploaded byRajesh Ramesh
- HW4_ISE170_2016 (1)Uploaded byAshwin Nair
- HP Storage Blade Family DatasheetUploaded byAbery Au
- Icono14. A9/V2. La realidad virtual inmersiva en ambientes inteligentes de aprendizajeUploaded byRevista ICONO14
- lect1-dbUploaded bygazi faisal
- Cics TutorialUploaded byDeena Dayalan
- Music Genre RecognitionUploaded byJibin Rajan Varghese
- HTK Based Speech Recognition Systems for Indian Regional languages: A ReviewUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Generation YUploaded bydedilim
- telecomanda vivacoUploaded bycostel979
- A Method for Detection and Modeling of TheUploaded byhopefullamit
- Apost Elet Digital-19Uploaded byRogério
- Gs1 General Specifications-V12Uploaded byMartijn Nijtram
- ETL +David+HubbardUploaded byMahesh Kumar
- ZUSEREXITUploaded byPedro Arroyo
- OSCM-2014Uploaded byjosué alves
- Assignment 1Uploaded byAmeya Thakur
- HR QUESTIONAREUploaded byRavinder Chahal
- Map AzimuthUploaded byjjpaul