IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

To Tune or not to Tune: Rule Evaluation for Metaheuristic-based Sequential Covering Algorithms











While many papers propose innovative methods for constructing individual rules in separate-and-conquer rule learning algorithms, comparatively few study the heuristic rule evaluation functions used in these algorithms to ensure that the selected rules combine into a good rule set. Underestimating the impact of this component has led to suboptimal design choices in many algorithms. The main goal of this paper is to demonstrate the importance of heuristic rule evaluation functions by improving existing rule induction techniques and to provide guidelines for algorithm designers.We first select optimal heuristic rule learning functions for several metaheuristic-based algorithms and empirically compare the resulting heuristics across algorithms. This results in large and significant improvements of the predictive accuracy for two techniques. We find that despite the absence of a global optimal choice for all algorithms, good default choices seem to exist for families of algorithms. A near-optimal selection can thus be found for new algorithms with minor experimental tuning. A major contribution is made towards balancing a model’s predictive accuracy with its comprehensibility, as the parametrized heuristics offer an unmatched flexibility when it comes to setting the trade-off between accuracy and comprehensibility.

Suggested Citation

  • B. Minnaert & D. Martens & M. De Backer & B. Baesens, 2012. "To Tune or not to Tune: Rule Evaluation for Metaheuristic-based Sequential Covering Algorithms," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 12/769, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
  • Handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:12/769

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item


    Classification · Rule Induction · Heuristics · Rule Evaluation ·Sequential Covering;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:12/769. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nathalie Verhaeghe). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.