ACM KDD Cup A Survey: 1997-2011 Qiang Yang (partly based on Xinyue Lius slides @SFU, and Nathan Lius slides @hkust) Hong Kong University of Science and Technology 1 About KDD Cup (1997 2011) Competition is a strong mover for Science and Engineering: ACM Programming Contest
World College level Programming skills ROBOCUP World Robotics Competition 2 About ACM KDDCUP ACM KDD: Premiere Conference in knowledge discovery and data mining ACM KDDCUP: Worldwide competition in conjunction with ACM KDD conferences. It aims at:
showcase the best methods for discovering higher-level knowledge from data. Helping to close the gap between research and industry Stimulating further KDD research and development 3 Statistics Participation in KDD Cup grew steadily Average person-hours per submission: 204 Max person-hours per submission: 910 Year Submissions 97 98 16 21 99
24 2000 2005 2011 30 32 1000+ 4 Algorithms (up to 2000) Algorithms Tried vs Submitted 20 18 16 Entries 14 12 Tried 10 Submitted 8 6
4 2 0 Algorithm 5 KDD Cup 97 A classification task to predict financial services industry (direct mail response) Winners Charles Elkan, a Prof from UC-San Diego with his Boosted Naive
Bayesian (BNB) Silicon Graphics, Inc with their software MineSet Urban Science Applicatio ns, Inc . with their software gain, Direct Marketing Selection System 6 MineSet (Silicon Graphics Inc.) A KDD tool that combines data access, transformation, classification, and visualization. 7 KDD Cup 98: CRM Benchmark URL:
www.kdnuggets.com/meetings /kdd98/kdd-cup-98.html A classification task to analyze fund raising mail responses to a non-profit organization Winners Urban Science Applications, Inc. with their software GainSmarts. SAS Institute, Inc. with their software SAS Enterprise Miner Quadstone Limited with their software Decisionhouse 8
KDDCUP 1998 Results $70,000 $65,000 $60,000 $55,000 $50,000 100% Maximum Possible Profit Line ($72,776 in profits with 4,873 mailed) 80% Mail to Everyone Solution ($10,560 in profits with 96,367 mailed) $45,000 $40,000 $35,000 GainSmarts SAS/Enterprise Miner $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $-
90% Quadstone/Decisionhouse 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% ACM KDD Cup 1999 URL: www.cse.ucsd.edu/users/elk an/kdresults.html Problem To detect network intrusion and protect a computer
network from unauthorized users, including perhaps insiders Data: from DoD Winners SAS Institute Inc. with their software Enterprise Miner. Amdocs with their Information Analysis Environment 10 KDDCUP 2000: Data Set and Goal: Data collected from Gazelle.com, a legwear and legcare Web retailer Pre-processed Training set: 2 months Test sets: one month Data collected includes:
Click streams Order information The goal to design models to support website personalization and to improve the profitability of the site by increasing customer response. Questions - When given a set of page views, characterize heavy spenders characterize killer pages characterize which product brand a visitor will view in
the remainder of the session? 11 KDDCUP 2000: The Winners Question 1 & 5 Winner: Amdocs Question 2 & 3 Winner: Salford Systems Question 4 Winner: e-steam 12 KDD Cup 2001 3 Bioinformatics Tasks
Dataset 1: Prediction of Molecular Bioactivity for Drug Design half a gigabyte when uncompressed Dataset 2: Prediction of Gene/Protein Function (task 2) and Localization (task 3) Dataset 2 is smaller and easier to understand 7 megabytes uncompressed
A total of 136 groups participated to produce a total of 200 submitted predictions over the 3 tasks: 114 for Thrombin, 41 for Function, and 45 for Localization. 13 2001 Winners Task 1, Thrombin: Jie Cheng (Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce). Bayesian network learner and classifier
Task 2, Function: Mark-A. Krogel (University of Magdeburg). Task 2: the genes of one particular type of organism A gene/protein can have more than one function, but only one localization. Inductive Logic programming Task 3, Localization: Hisashi Hayashi, Jun Sese, and Shinichi Morishita
(University of Tokyo). K nearest neighbor 14 molecular biology : Two Winners: tasks Task 1: Document extraction from biological articles Task 2: Classification of proteins based on
gene deletion experiments Task 1: ClearForest and Celera, USA Yizhar Regev and Michal Finkelstein Task 2: Telstra Research Laboratories , Australia Adam Kowalczyk and Bhavani Raskutti 15 2003 KDDCUP Information Retrieval/Citation Mining of
Scientific research papers based on a very large archive of research papers First Task: predict how many citations each paper will receive during the three months leading up to the KDD 2003 conference Second Task: a citation graph of a large subset of the archive from only the LaTex sources Third Task: each paper's popularity will be estimated based on partial download logs Last Task: devise their own questions
16 2003 KDDCUP: Results Task 1: Task 2: 1st place: David Vogel AI Insight Inc. Task 3:
Claudia Perlich, Foster Provost, Sofus Kacskassy New York University Janez Brank and Jure Leskovec Jozef Stefan Institute, Slovenija Task 4: Amy McGovern, Lisa Friedland, Michael Hay, Brian Gallagher, Andrew Fast, Jennifer Neville, and David Jensen University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA 17 2004 Tasks and Results
Particle physics; plus protein homology prediction David S. Vogel, Eric Gottschalk, and Morgan C. Wang Bernhard Pfahringer, Yan Fu ( ), RuiXiang Sun, Qiang Yang ( ), Simin He, Chunli Wang, Haipeng Wang, Shiguang Shan, Junfa Liu, Wen Gao. 18 Past KDDCUP Overview: 20052010 Year Host
Task Technique Winner 2005 Microsoft Web query categorization Feature Engineering, Ensemble HKUST 2006 Siemens Pulmonary emboli detection Multi-instance, NonIID sample, Cost
sensitive, Class Imbalance, Noisy data AT&T, Budapest University of Technology & Economics 2007 Netflix Consumer recommendation Collaborative Filtering, Time series, Ensemble IBM Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences 2008
Siemens Breast cancer detection from medical images Ensemble, Class imbalance, Score calibration IBM Research, National Taiwan University 2009 Orange Customer relationship prediction in telecom Feature selection, Ensemble
IBM Research, University of Melbourne 2010 PSLC Data Student Feature engineering, National KDDCUP11 Dataset 11 years of data Rated items are Tracks Albums Artists
Genres Items arranges in a taxonomy Two tasks Track 1 Track 2 #ratings 263M 63M #items 625K 296K #users 1M 249K Items in a Taxonomy Track 1 Details
Track 1 Highlights Largest publicly available dataset Large number of items (50 times more than Netflix) Extreme rating sparsity (20 times more sparse than Netflix) Taxonomy can help in combating sparsely rated items. Fine time stamps with both date and time allow sophisticated temporal modeling. Track 2 Details Track 2 Highlights
Performance metric focus on ranking/ classification, which differs from traditional collaborative filtering. No validation data provided, need to selfconstruct binary labeled data from rating data. Unlike track 1, track 2 removed time stamps to focus more than long term preference rather than short term behaviors. Submission Stats Winners Track 1 Track 2 1st place National Taiwan University National Taiwan University 2nd place Commendo (Netflix Prize Winnder)
Chinese Academy of Science, Hulu Labs 3rd place Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Shanghai Jiaotong University Commendo (Netflix Prize Winnder) Chinese Teams at KDDCUP (NTU, CAS, HKUST) Key Techniques Track 1:
Blending of multiple techniques Matrix factorization models Nearest neighbor models Restricted Bolzmann machines Temporal modelings Track 2: Importance sampling of negative instances Taxonomical modelings Use of pairwise ranking objective functions Summary To place on top of KDDCUP requires
Team work Expertise in domain knowledge as well as mathematical tools Often done by world famous institutes and companies Recent trends: Dataset increasingly more realistic Participants increasingly more professional Tasks are increasingly more difficult 30 Summary KDD Cup is an excellent source to learn the state-of-art KDD techniques
KDDCUP dataset often becomes the standard benchmark for future research, development and teaching Top winners are highly regarded and respected 31 References Elkan C. (1997). Boosting and Naive Bayesian Learning. Technical Report No. CS97-557, September 1997, UCSD. Decisionhouse (1998). KDD Cup 98: Quadstone Take Bronze Miner Award. Retrieved March 15, 2001 from http://www.kdnuggets.com/meetings/kdd98/quadston e/index.html Urbane Science (1998). Urbane Science wins the KDD-98 Cup. Retrieved March 15, 2001 from http://www.kdnuggets.com/meetings/kdd98/gain-kddc up98-release.html Georges, J. & Milley, A. (1999). KDD99 Competition: Knowledge Discovery Contest. Retrieved March 15, 2001 from http://www.cse.ucsd.edu/users/elkan/saskdd99.pdf Rosset, S. & Inger A. (1999). KDD-Cup 99 : Knowledge Discovery In a Charitable Organizations Donor Database. Retrieved March 15, 2001 from http://www.cse.ucsd.edu/users/elkan/KDD2.doc
32 References (Cont.) Sebastiani P., Ramoni M. & Crea A. (1999). Profiling your Customers using Bayesian Networks. Retrieved March 15, 2001 from http://bayesware.com/resources/tutorials/ kddcup99/kddcup99.pdf Inger A., Vatnik N., Rosset S. & Neumann E. (2000). KDDCup 2000: Question 1 Winners Report. Retrieved March 18, 2000 from http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/KDDCUP/amdocs-slides-1.ppt Neumann E., Vatnik N., Rosset S., Duenias M., Sasson I. & Inger A. (2000). KDD-Cup 2000: Question 5 Winners Report. Retrieved March 18, 2000 from http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/KDDCUP/amdocs-slides-5.ppt Salford System white papers: http://www.salford-systems.com/whitepaper.html Summary talk presented at KDD (2000) http://robotics.stanford.edu/~ronnyk/kddCupTalk.ppt 33 References (cont)
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~dpage/kddcup2001/Cheng.pdf http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~dpage/kddcup2001/Krogel.pdf http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~dpage/kddcup2001/Hayashi.pdf 34
