Reply to comment
I don't agree...
September 4, 2008
by Anonymous,
1 year 11 weeks ago
Comment: 31794
Reply
About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.Recommended
Andrew Sullivan Dan Sullivan Doug Arellanes Emmanuelle Richard Faith Sullivan Fred Bortz Heather Havrilesky Henry Copeland Kate Sullivan Ken Layne lagreenbean.com LAist.com Maggie Sullivan Matt Welch NewYorkology Opinion L.A. Ron Kaye Slashdot Steve Elzer & Family TheNewsroom.org Thor Garcia Tony Pierce Wonkette OlderThanks CNET for naming Science Blog one of your Blog 100!
Pattern Recognition is viable only for particular cases. However, for the cases where test sets cannot be generated (or there's no benefit to generating them), wouldn't it be better to use CART, c4.5, c5, or other similar clustering algorithms? These algorithms are widely used in both academic and commercial sectors, and I would even venture that Pattern Recognition is lower on the totem pole than these.