Scribd
Upload
18 views2 pages

Candidate Elimination Algorithm Example

This document applies the candidate elimination algorithm to find consistent hypotheses based on examples of books with different attributes. It starts with the most specific and generic boundaries and iteratively updates them based on whether examples are positive or negative matches to the hypotheses.

Uploaded by

kishore5783
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
18 views2 pages

Candidate Elimination Algorithm Example

This document applies the candidate elimination algorithm to find consistent hypotheses based on examples of books with different attributes. It starts with the most specific and generic boundaries and iteratively updates them based on whether examples are positive or negative matches to the hypotheses.

Uploaded by

kishore5783
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Example – 3 (Candidate Elimination Algorithm):

Apply the Candidate Elimination Algorithm to find the set of consistent hypotheses .
Example Citations Size InLibrary Price Editions

1 Some Small No Affordable One

2 Many Big No Expensive Many

3 Many Medium No Expensive Few

4 Many Small No Affordable Many

Solution:

S0: (0, 0, 0, 0, 0) Most Specific Boundary

G0: (?, ?, ?, ?, ?) Most Generic Boundary

The first example is negative, the hypothesis at the specific boundary is consistent,
hence we retain it, and the hypothesis at the generic boundary is inconsistent hence
we write all consistent hypotheses by removing one “?” at a time.

S1: (0, 0, 0, 0, 0)

G1: (Many,?,?,?, ?) (?, Big,?,?,?) (?,Medium,?,?,?) (?,?,?,Exp,?) (?,?,?,?,One) (?,?,?,?,Few)

The second example is positive, the hypothesis at the specific boundary is


inconsistent, hence we extend the specific boundary, and the consistent hypothesis
at the generic boundary is retained and inconsistent hypotheses are removed from
the generic boundary.

S2: (Many, Big, No, Exp, Many)

G2: (Many,?,?,?, ?) (?, Big,?,?,?) (?,?,?,Exp,?) (?,?,?,?,Many)

The third example is positive, the hypothesis at the specific boundary is inconsistent,
hence we extend the specific boundary, and the consistent hypothesis at the generic
boundary is retained and inconsistent hypotheses are removed from the generic
boundary.
S3: (Many, ?, No, Exp, ?)
G3: (Many,?,?,?,?) (?,?,?,exp,?)

The fourth example is positive, the hypothesis at the specific boundary is


inconsistent, hence we extend the specific boundary, and the consistent hypothesis
at the generic boundary is retained and inconsistent hypotheses are removed from
the generic boundary.

S4: (Many, ?, No, ?, ?)

G4: (Many,?,?,?,?)

Learned Version Space by Candidate Elimination Algorithm for given data set is:
(Many, ?, No, ?, ?) (Many, ?, ?, ?, ?)

You might also like