专家意见调查:哪种机器学习方法可以用于哪种任务?

V. Moustakis, M. Lehto, G. Salvendy
{"title":"专家意见调查:哪种机器学习方法可以用于哪种任务?","authors":"V. Moustakis, M. Lehto, G. Salvendy","doi":"10.1080/10447319609526150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Determining the most appropriate Machine Learning (ML) method, system, or algorithm for a particular application is not trivial. This article reports on a survey of 103 experts specializing in ML who were asked to rate ML method appropriateness to intelligent tasks. Ratings were captured via a structured questionnaire including 12 ML methods and 9 task categories. Results showed that the experts mapped particular ML methods to task categories. Factor analysis revealed three fundamental factors, which explained most of the variance in the expert ratings. Machine learning methods could be grouped on the basis of these factors into six application categories, wherein one or more methods were deemed most appropriate by the evaluated group of experts. This, in turn, concludes that cooperation between alternative ML methods may be necessary to support one or more intelligent tasks.","PeriodicalId":208962,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact.","volume":"182 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survey of expert opinion: Which machine learning method may be used for which task?\",\"authors\":\"V. Moustakis, M. Lehto, G. Salvendy\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10447319609526150\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Determining the most appropriate Machine Learning (ML) method, system, or algorithm for a particular application is not trivial. This article reports on a survey of 103 experts specializing in ML who were asked to rate ML method appropriateness to intelligent tasks. Ratings were captured via a structured questionnaire including 12 ML methods and 9 task categories. Results showed that the experts mapped particular ML methods to task categories. Factor analysis revealed three fundamental factors, which explained most of the variance in the expert ratings. Machine learning methods could be grouped on the basis of these factors into six application categories, wherein one or more methods were deemed most appropriate by the evaluated group of experts. This, in turn, concludes that cooperation between alternative ML methods may be necessary to support one or more intelligent tasks.\",\"PeriodicalId\":208962,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact.\",\"volume\":\"182 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1996-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"16\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10447319609526150\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10447319609526150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

摘要

为特定应用程序确定最合适的机器学习(ML)方法、系统或算法并非易事。本文报告了一项对103名ML专家的调查,他们被要求评价ML方法对智能任务的适当性。通过包含12 ML方法和9个任务类别的结构化问卷来获取评分。结果表明,专家将特定的ML方法映射到任务类别。因子分析揭示了三个基本因素,它们解释了专家评级的大部分差异。基于这些因素,机器学习方法可以分为六个应用类别,其中一种或多种方法被评估的专家组认为是最合适的。这反过来又得出结论,为了支持一个或多个智能任务,可能需要在不同的ML方法之间进行合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Survey of expert opinion: Which machine learning method may be used for which task?
Determining the most appropriate Machine Learning (ML) method, system, or algorithm for a particular application is not trivial. This article reports on a survey of 103 experts specializing in ML who were asked to rate ML method appropriateness to intelligent tasks. Ratings were captured via a structured questionnaire including 12 ML methods and 9 task categories. Results showed that the experts mapped particular ML methods to task categories. Factor analysis revealed three fundamental factors, which explained most of the variance in the expert ratings. Machine learning methods could be grouped on the basis of these factors into six application categories, wherein one or more methods were deemed most appropriate by the evaluated group of experts. This, in turn, concludes that cooperation between alternative ML methods may be necessary to support one or more intelligent tasks.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信