<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Data Mining With Weka</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2008/04/24/data-mining-with-weka/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2008/04/24/data-mining-with-weka/</link>
	<description>Thoughts, rants, and even some code from the mind of Barney Boisvert.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 19:30:44 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Weka Mining Update: It Works! at BarneyBlog</title>
		<link>http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2008/04/24/data-mining-with-weka/#comment-108711</link>
		<dc:creator>Weka Mining Update: It Works! at BarneyBlog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:08:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/?p=384#comment-108711</guid>
		<description>[...] in April, I posted about how I was using Weka to do some asset prioritization.  The gist of it was that users would rank assets on a 1-5 scale, and then then the system would [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] in April, I posted about how I was using Weka to do some asset prioritization.  The gist of it was that users would rank assets on a 1-5 scale, and then then the system would [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: barneyb</title>
		<link>http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2008/04/24/data-mining-with-weka/#comment-99303</link>
		<dc:creator>barneyb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:48:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/?p=384#comment-99303</guid>
		<description>Jim,

It's hard to say.  There has been a slight skewing downward overall, but from some manual checks that I've done against asset similarity (e.g. manually figuring out what cluster an unranked asset probably belongs to), it's reasonable.  To put that another way, prioritized assets average a slightly higher rank than randomized assets, which is just what you'd expect.  I haven't done any actual math to quantify the skew, but only because what I'm seeing seems reasonable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jim,</p>
<p>It's hard to say.  There has been a slight skewing downward overall, but from some manual checks that I've done against asset similarity (e.g. manually figuring out what cluster an unranked asset probably belongs to), it's reasonable.  To put that another way, prioritized assets average a slightly higher rank than randomized assets, which is just what you'd expect.  I haven't done any actual math to quantify the skew, but only because what I'm seeing seems reasonable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/2008/04/24/data-mining-with-weka/#comment-99298</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:16:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.barneyb.com/barneyblog/?p=384#comment-99298</guid>
		<description>Hi Barney,

How did your test of seeding unranked items go?  Did it skew the results at all?  

Can you post some of your finding?

Thanks,

--j</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Barney,</p>
<p>How did your test of seeding unranked items go?  Did it skew the results at all?  </p>
<p>Can you post some of your finding?</p>
<p>Thanks,</p>
<p>&#8211;j</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
