Closed Classes of Binary Complete Decision Tables with Many-Valued Decisions ()
1. Introduction
In this paper, we continue to study the relationships between deterministic decision trees and decision rule systems (represented as nondeterministic or strongly nondeterministic decision trees) for three types of classes of decision tables with many-valued decisions closed relative to removal of columns and changing of decisions. A class of tables is closed relative to the considered operations if, for any table in the class, we can remove any number of columns (attributes) from that table and change the decisions attached to rows, and the resulting table will still be in the class.
The main results we have obtained in this direction earlier are collected in our book [1], in which arbitrary closed classes and arbitrary bounded complexity measures are investigated. The goal of this work is a more in-depth study of special types of closed classes and complexity measures.
Decision trees [2]-[6] and decision rule systems [7]-[11] are widely used for knowledge representation, classification, and problem solving in areas such as fault diagnosis and combinatorial optimization. These models are among the most interpretable classification and knowledge representation methods [12]. Understanding the relationships between decision trees and decision rules is an important area of research in computer science.
Decision tables with many-valued decisions often arise in data analysis, where they are called multi-label decision tables [13]-[15]. They are also widely used in areas such as combinatorial optimization, computational geometry, and fault diagnosis to represent and analyze problems [10] [16].
Various classes of objects closed under certain operations have been studied extensively. Well-known examples are the classes of Boolean functions closed under superposition [17], and the minor-closed classes of graphs [18]. Decision tables with many-valued decisions are an interesting mathematical object that deserves further study, especially in the context of studying closed classes of decision tables. The most natural examples of closed classes of decision tables are those generated by information systems [19], where each problem in the system is transformed into a decision table [1]. However, the family of all closed classes is significantly larger than the family of closed classes generated by information systems.
In this paper, we consider three types of classes of binary complete decision tables with many-valued decisions closed under operations of removal of columns and changing of decisions. For tables from these classes, we study the relationships between the minimum weighted depth of deterministic, nondeterministic, and (for one type of classes) strongly nondeterministic decision trees and the total weight of attributes attached to the columns. We study weighted depth of decision trees instead of standard depth because the complexity of computing values for different attributes can vary greatly.
A binary complete decision table with many-valued decisions is a rectangular table with
columns labeled with pairwise distinct attributes and
pairwise distinct rows filled with numbers from the set
. Each row of this table is labeled with a nonempty finite set of decisions. The rows are interpreted as tuples of attribute values. We also consider two special kinds of binary complete decision tables with many-valued decisions: conventional tables in which each decision set contains exactly one decisions and tables with 0-1-decisions in which each decision set is either
or
.
For a given row of the decision table, we must find a decision from the set of decisions attached to the row. To do this, we can use the following queries: we can select an attribute and ask what the value of that attribute is in the row in question.
We study three types of algorithms based on these queries: deterministic, nondeterministic and strongly nondeterministic decision trees. The latter are used only for tables with 0-1-decisions. One can interpret nondeterministic decision trees for a decision table as a way of representing an arbitrary system of true decision rules for this table that cover all rows. One can interpret strongly nondeterministic decision trees for a decision table with 0-1-decisions as a way of representing an arbitrary system of true decision rules for this table that cover all rows labeled with the set
. To characterize the time complexity of decision trees, we consider their weighted depth, which is equal to the maximum total weight of attributes on a path from the root to a terminal node of the tree.
Binary complete decision tables with many-valued decisions can be viewed as representations of various problems involving decision rule systems with binary attributes. Consider three examples:
The problem of finding, for a given tuple of attribute values, a rule with a true left-hand side for this tuple can be represented as a table with many-valued decisions.
The problem of finding, for a given tuple of attribute values, the set of rules with a true left-hand side for this tuple can be represented as a conventional table.
The problem of the existence of a rule with a true left-hand side for a given tuple of attribute values can be represented as a table with 0-1-decisions.
The notion of a binary complete decision table with 0-1-decisions actually coincides with the notion of a Boolean function. Binary complete decision tables with many-valued decisions are an interesting generalization of Boolean functions. The properties of these tables may differ significantly from the properties of Boolean functions. For example, for any Boolean function, the minimum depth of a deterministic decision tree does not exceed the square of the minimum depth of a nondeterministic decision tree [20]-[22] (see also [23]). In Chap. 7 of the book [1], we constructed an infinite sequence of binary complete decision tables with many-valued decisions for which the minimum depth of deterministic decision trees is not bounded from above by a constant, and the minimum depth of nondeterministic decision trees does not exceed 3.
In this paper, for classes of each type, we study the functions characterizing the worst-case growth of the minimum weighted depth of deterministic and nondeterministic decision trees for decision tables from the class with increasing total weight of attributes attached to the table columns. For classes of decision tables with 0-1-decisions, we study the function characterizing the worst-case growth of the minimum weighted depth of strongly nondeterministic decision trees for decision tables from the class with increasing total weight of attributes attached to the table columns. We prove that each of these functions is either bounded from above by a constant or grows almost linearly. The main novelty is that we found simple criteria for the behavior of these functions: it is enough to recognize whether the total weight of attributes for tables from the class is bounded from above by a constant. In general, we need to study the behavior of the number of rows in tables in a class and the behavior of the minimum complexity of the set of attributes that separate a given row from all other rows of the table.
For classes of each type, a function is studied that characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of a deterministic decision tree for a decision table from a class with the growth of the minimum weighted depth of a nondeterministic decision tree for the table. For classes of decision tables with many-valued decisions, a condition is specified under which the function is defined everywhere. For the function that is defined everywhere, its behavior is studied. In particular, a condition is specified under which the function under consideration, depending on
, is bounded from above by a polynomial in
. For classes of conventional decision tables and tables with 0-1-decisions, it is proved that the function under consideration is defined everywhere and does not exceed
. The main novelty for the classes of decision tables with many-valued decisions is that it is sufficient to consider how the maximum number of attributes with a weight of no more than
in a table from a class (if the maximum exists) grows with
. The criteria for the general case considered in [1] are significantly more complex. The main novelty for classes of conventional decision tables and decision tables with 0-1-decisions is that it was possible to generalize the previously obtained results for the depth of decision trees for Boolean functions [20]-[22] to the case of weighted depth of decision trees for such tables.
For classes of decision tables with 0-1-decisions, a function is also studied that characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of a deterministic decision tree for a decision table from a class with the growth of the minimum weighted depth of a strongly nondeterministic decision tree for the table. A condition is specified under which the function is defined everywhere. For the function that is defined everywhere, its behavior is studied. In particular, a condition is specified under which the function under consideration is bounded from above by a polynomial in
. The main novelty is that it suffices to consider how the maximum number of attributes with a weight no greater than
in a table from a class grows with
(if the maximum exists). The criteria for the general case, considered in [1], are more complex.
The proofs of the new statements are based, in particular, on the results obtained in [1]. This explains the fact that in our work we use many definitions and notation from the book [1] with minimal changes.
This paper is an extension of two conference papers: paper [24], which contains results for classes of tables with many-valued decisions, and paper [25], whose proof we adapted to show upper bounds on
for the function describing the relationship between deterministic and nondeterministic decision trees.
The paper consists of six sections. Section 2 discusses the basic definitions and notation. Sections 3-5 are devoted to studying classes of tables with many-valued decisions, classes of conventional tables, and classes of tables with 0-1-decisions, respectively. Section 6 contains brief conclusions.
2. Main Definitions and Notation
In this section, when considering the main definitions and notations, we either quote verbatim or very closely to the text from our book [1].
Denote
and
. Let
be the set of attributes (really, names of attributes). Two attributes
are considered different if
.
2.1. Decision Tables and Their Closed Classes
We now define three families of nonempty finite subsets of the set
. Let
be the family of all nonempty finite subsets of the set
,
, and
.
Definition 1 Denote by
the set of rectangular tables filled with numbers from
in each of which rows are pairwise different, each row is labeled with a set from
(set of decisions), and columns are labeled with pairwise different attributes from
. Rows are interpreted as tuples of values of these attributes. Empty tables without rows belong also to the set
. Tables from
will be called decision tables with many-valued decisions.
Definition 2 Denote by
the set of tables from
in which each row is labeled with a set from
. Empty tables without rows belong also to the set
. Tables from
will be called conventional decision tables.
Definition 3 Denote by
the set of tables from
in which each row is labeled with a set from
. Empty tables without rows belong also to the set
. Tables from
will be called decision tables with 0-1-decisions.
It is clear that
.
For a table
, we denote by
the intersection of sets of decisions attached to rows of
. Decisions from
are called common decisions for the table
.
Let
be a nonempty table from
. Denote by
the set of attributes attached to columns of the table
. We denote by
the set of finite words over the alphabet
including the empty word
. For any
, we now define a subtable
of the table
. If
, then
. If
and
, then
is the table obtained from
by removal of all rows that do not satisfy the following condition: in columns labeled with attributes
, the row has numbers
, respectively.
We now define four operations on decision tables: removal of columns and changing of decisions. Let
.
Definition 4 Removal of columns. We can remove from
any columns. In each group of rows equal on the remaining columns, we keep the first one.
Definition 5
-Changing of decisions. We can change sets of decisions attached to rows of
to arbitrary sets from
.
Definition 6
-Changing of decisions. We can change sets of decisions attached to rows of
to arbitrary sets from
.
Definition 7
-Changing of decisions. We can change sets of decisions attached to rows of
to arbitrary sets from
.
Definition 8 Let
and
. The class (the set) of decision tables
will be called a closed class of decision tables from
if it is closed under operations of removal of columns and
-changing of decisions.
Definition 9 Let
and
. The class (the set) of decision tables
will be called a closed class of decision tables from
if it is closed under operations of removal of columns and
-changing of decisions.
Definition 10 Let
and
. The class (the set) of decision tables
will be called a closed class of decision tables from
if it is closed under operations of removal of columns and
-changing of decisions.
A closed class of decision tables will be called nontrivial if it contains nonempty decision tables.
Definition 11 A nonempty decision table
is called complete if
contains
rows. Empty table
without rows and columns is complete by definition.
Later we will consider only nontrivial closed classes of complete decision tables from
, from
or from
. It is clear that each such class contains the empty table Λ.
2.2. Deterministic, Nondeterministic, and Strongly Nondeterministic Decision Trees
A finite tree with root is a finite directed tree in which exactly one node called the root has no entering edges. The nodes without leaving edges are called terminal nodes.
Definition 12 A 2-decision tree is a finite tree with root, which has at least two nodes and in which
The root and edges leaving the root are not labeled.
Each terminal node is labeled with a decision from the set
.
Each node, which is neither the root nor a terminal node (such nodes will be called working), is labeled with an attribute from the set
. Each edge leaving working node is labeled with a number from the set
.
We denote by
the set of all 2-decision trees. Let
. We denote by
the set of attributes attached to working nodes of Γ. A complete path of Γ is a sequence
of nodes and edges of Γ in which
is the root of Γ,
is a terminal node of Γ and, for
, the edge
leaves the node
and enters the node
. We denote by
the decision attached to the terminal node of
.
Let
be a nonempty table from
. If
, then we correspond to the table
and the complete path
a word
. If
, then
. If
and, for
, the node
is labeled with the attribute
and the edge
is labeled with the number
, then
. Denote
.
Definition 13 Let
be a nonempty table from
. A deterministic decision tree for the table
is a 2-decision tree Γ satisfying the following conditions:
Only one edge leaves the root of Γ.
For any working node, edges leaving this node are labeled with pairwise different numbers.
.
For any row of
, there exists a complete path
of Γ such that the considered row belongs to the table
.
For any complete path
of Γ, either
is empty or the decision
attached to the terminal node of
is a common decision for the table
.
Definition 14 Let
be a nonempty table from
. A nondeterministic decision tree for the table
is a 2-decision tree Γ satisfying the following conditions:
.
For any row of
, there exists a complete path
of Γ such that the considered row belongs to the table
.
For any complete path
of Γ, either
is empty or the decision
attached to the terminal node of
is a common decision for the table
.
Definition 15 Let
be a nonempty table from
without common decisions. A strongly nondeterministic decision tree for the table
is a 2-decision tree Γ satisfying the following conditions:
Each terminal node is labeled with the decision 1.
.
For any row of
labeled with the set of decisions
, there exists a complete path
of Γ such that the considered row belongs to the table
.
For any complete path
of Γ, either
is empty or 1 is the common decision for the table
.
2.3. Weighted Depth and Complexity Parameters
Denote by
the set of all finite words over the alphabet
, which contains the empty word
.
Definition 16 A weighted depth is an arbitrary function
such that
,
for any
and
for any nonempty word
. The weighted depth
such that
for any
is called the depth and is denoted
.
Definition 17 Let
be a weighted dept. We extend it to the set of all finite subsets of the set
. Let
be a finite subset of the set
. If
, then
. If
and
, then
.
Definition 18 Let
be a weighted depth. We extend it to the set of finite words
over the alphabet
including the empty word
. Let
. If
, then
. If
and
, then
.
Definition 19 Let
be a weighted depth. We extend it to the set
. Let
. Then
, where the maximum is taken over all complete paths
of the decision tree Γ. For a given weighted depth
, the value
will be called the weighted depth of the decision tree Γ. The value
will be called the depth of the decision tree Γ.
Let
be a weighted depth. We now describe the functions
,
,
,
, and
defined on the set
. By definition, the value of each of these functions for an empty table is equal 0. Let
be a nonempty table from
. Then
, where the minimum is taken over all deterministic decision trees Γ for the table
.
, where the minimum is taken over all nondeterministic decision trees Γ for the table
.
.
. This is the total weight of attributes attached to columns of the table
. It is clear that
.
Let
be a row of the table
. Denote , where the minimum is taken over all subsets
of the set
such that in the set of columns of
labeled with attributes from
the row
is different from all other rows of the table
. Then , where the maximum is taken over all rows
of the table
.
Let
be a weighted depth. We now describe the function
defined on the set
. By definition, the value of this function for an empty table or a table with a common decision is equal 0. Let
be a nonempty table from
without common decisions. Then
3. Closed Classes of Complete Decision Tables with
Many-Valued Decisions
In this section, building on Chapter 7 of our book [1], we obtain more in-depth results for a special case—weighted depth and closed classes of binary complete decision tables with many-valued decisions. To make reading easier, we try to follow the text of the book [1] as closely as possible.
In this section, we consider results obtained in the paper for the functions
,
, and
.
3.1. Function
Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. We now define a function
. Let
. Then
The function
characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of deterministic decision trees for decision tables from
with the growth of the total weight of attributes attached to columns of these tables.
Let
be an infinite subset of the set
in which, for any
,
. We now define a function
. Let
. If
, then
. If, for some
,
, then
.
Theorem 1 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. Then
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
. For this function, one of the following statements holds:
(a) If the function
is bounded from above on the class
, then there exists a positive constant
such that
for any
.
(b) If the function
is not bounded from above on the class
, then there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
.
For the depth
, the bound from the statement (b) of Theorem 1 can be improved.
Theorem 2 Let
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
for which the function
is not bounded from above. Then
for any
.
We now consider two auxiliary statements. The next lemma follows directly from Lemma 7.1 [1].
Lemma 3 For any weighted depth
and any complete decision table
from
,
Lemma 4 For any weighted depth
and any complete decision table
from
,
Proof. Let
. Then
by definition. Let
be a nonempty complete table,
be a row of the table
, and
be a subset of the set
such that in the set of columns of
labeled with attributes from
the row
is different from all other rows of the table
. Since, for any column of
, there exists a row of
different from
only in this column,
. Therefore . Since rows of
are pairwise different, the row
is different from all other rows of the table
in the set of all columns of
. Therefore . Thus,
and
. □
Proof of Theorem 1. From Theorem 7.1 [1] it follows that
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
.
(a) Let the function
be bounded from above on the class
by a positive constant
. Using Lemma 3, we obtain that the function
is bounded from above on the class
by
. Therefore
for any
.
(b) Let the function
be not bounded from above on the class
. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 7.1 [1] it follows that there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
. □
Proof of Theorem 2. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 7.2 [1] it follows that
for any
. □
3.2. Function
Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. We now define a function
. Let
. Then
The function
characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of nondeterministic decision trees for decision tables from
with the growth of the total weight of attributes attached to columns of these tables.
Theorem 5 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. Then
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
. For this function, one of the following statements holds:
(a) If the function
is bounded from above on the class
, then there exists a positive constant
such that
for any
.
(b) If the function
is not bounded from above on the class
, then there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
.
For the depth
, the bound from the statement (b) of Theorem 5 can be improved.
Theorem 6 Let
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
for which the function
is not bounded from above. Then
for any
.
The next statement follows directly from Lemma 7.6 [1].
Lemma 7 For any weighted depth
and any complete table
from
,
Proof of Theorem 5. From Theorem 7.3 [1] it follows that
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
.
(a) Let the function
be bounded from above on the class
by a positive constant
. Using Lemmas 3 and 7, we obtain that the function
is bounded from above on the class
by
. Therefore
for any
.
(b) Let the function
be not bounded from above on the class
. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 7.3 [1] it follows that there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
. □
Proof of Theorem 6. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 7.4 [1] it follows that
for any
. □
3.3. Function
Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. We now define possibly partial function
. Let
. If the set
is infinite, then the value
is undefined. Otherwise,
. This definition is correct since
,
and therefore the set
is nonempty.
The function
characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of deterministic decision trees for decision tables from
with the growth of the minimum weighted depth of nondeterministic decision trees for these tables.
We now define possibly partial function
. Let
. If the set
is infinite, then the value
is undefined. Otherwise,
. This definition is correct since
,
and therefore the set
is nonempty. It is clear that
. Therefore
.
The following statement describes a criterion for the function
to be everywhere defined.
Theorem 8 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. Then the function
is everywhere defined if and only if the function
is everywhere defined.
The next statement clarifies the behavior of everywhere defined function
.
Theorem 9 Let
be a weighted depth,
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
, and the function
be everywhere defined. Then
(a) For any
,
and
.
(b) A polynomial
such that
for any
exists if and only if there exists a polynomial
such that
for any
.
We now consider two auxiliary statements. The first one follows from Lemmas 7.13 and 7.15 [1].
Lemma 10 For any
, there exists a complete decision table
such that
,
and
.
Lemma 11 Let
be a weighted depth,
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
, and the function
be everywhere defined. Then the function
is everywhere defined and
for any
.
Proof. Let
and
be a table from the class
for which
. Let us show that
. If
is empty or has a common decision, then, as it is easy to show,
and the considered inequality holds.
Let
be a nonempty table without common decisions and Γ be a nondeter-ministic decision tree for
such that
. It is clear that
. Let
. We now describe a deterministic decision tree
for the table
. This tree sequentially computes values of the attributes
. The set of words
corresponding to complete paths
of
coincides with the set
. It is clear that, for any row of
, there exists a complete path
of
such that the considered row belongs to the subtable
. Let us consider an arbitrary complete path
of
with
. It is clear that the subtable
is nonempty. Let
be a row of
. Then in Γ there exists a complete path
such that
is a row of subtable
and the subtable
has a common decision
. It is clear that the set of letters of the word
is a subset of the set of letters of the word
. Therefore
is a common decision of the subtable
. The minimum common decision for the subtable
is attached to the terminal node of the path
. It is easy to check that the tree
is indeed a deterministic decision tree for the table
.
Since
, for any
,
. It is clear that
. Using the fact that
is a closed class, we obtain
. Therefore
and
. Thus, for any table
such that
, the inequality
holds. As a result, we obtain that the value
is defined and
. □
Proof of Theorem 8. Let the function
be everywhere defined. Then, by Lemma 11, the function
is everywhere defined.
Let the function
be not everywhere defined. Then there exists a number
for which the value
is undefined. From here and from Lemma 10 it follows that, for any
, there exists a complete decision table
such that
,
,
and
. Since
and
,
. It is clear that
. As a result, we obtain that the set
is infinite and the value
is undefined. □
Proof of Theorem 9. (a) Using Theorem 8, we obtain that the function
is everywhere defined. From here and from Lemma 11 it follows that
for any
.
We now show that
for any
. If
, then, evidently,
. Let
and
be the maximum number from
such that
. From
Lemma 10 it follows that there exists a complete decision table
such that
,
,
and
. Since
and
,
. It is clear that
. Evidently,
. Therefore
and
. Thus,
.
(b) Let there exist a polynomial
such that
for any
. From part (a) of the theorem statement it follows that
for any
. Therefore there exists polynomial
such that
for any
.
Let there be no a polynomial
such that
for any
. We now show that there is no a polynomial
such that
for any
. Assume the contrary: there exists a polynomial
such that
for any
. From part (a) of the theorem statement it follows that
for any
. Therefore
for any
. Thus, there exists polynomial
such that
for any
, but this is impossible. □
4. Closed Classes of Complete Conventional Decision Tables
This section is based on Chapter 8 of our book [1] and paper [25], the proof of which we adapted to demonstrate upper bounds on
for the function describing the relationship between deterministic and nondeterministic decision trees. Our goal is to obtain deeper results for the special case of weighted depth and closed classes of conventional binary complete decision tables. For readability, we try to follow the text of [1] as closely as possible.
In this section, we consider results obtained in the paper for the functions
,
, and
.
4.1. Function
Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. We now define a function
. Let
. Then
The function
characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of deterministic decision trees for decision tables from
with the growth of the total weight of attributes attached to columns of these tables.
Theorem 12 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. Then
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
. For this function, one of the following statements holds:
(a) If the function
is bounded from above on the class
, then there exists a positive constant
such that
for any
.
(b) If the function
is not bounded from above on the class
, then there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
.
Proof. From Theorem 8.1 [1] it follows that
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
.
(a) Let the function
be bounded from above on the class
by a positive constant
. Using Lemma 3, we obtain that the function
is bounded from above on the class
by
. Therefore
for any
.
(b) Let the function
be not bounded from above on the class
. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 8.1 [1] it follows that there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
. □
For the depth
, the bound from the statement (b) of Theorem 12 can be improved.
Theorem 13 Let
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
for which the function
is not bounded from above. Then
for any
.
Proof. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 8.2 [1] it follows that
for any
. □
4.2. Function
Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. We now define a function
. Let
. Then
The function
characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of nondeterministic decision trees for decision tables from
with the growth of the total weight of attributes attached to columns of these tables.
Theorem 14 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. Then
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
. For this function, one of the following statements holds:
(a) If the function
is bounded from above on the class
, then there exists a positive constant
such that
for any
.
(b) If the function
is not bounded from above on the class
, then there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
.
Proof. From Theorem 8.3 [1] it follows that
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
.
(a) Let the function
be bounded from above on the class
by a positive constant
. Using Lemmas 3 and 7, we obtain that the function
is bounded from above on the class
by
. Therefore
for any
.
(b) Let the function
be not bounded from above on the class
. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 8.3 [1] it follows that there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
. □
For the depth
, the bound from the statement (b) of Theorem 14 can be improved.
Theorem 15 Let
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
for which the function
is not bounded from above. Then
for any
.
Proof. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 8.4 [1] it follows that
for any
. □
4.3. Function
Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. We now define possibly partial function
. Let
. If the set
is infinite, then the value
is undefined. Otherwise,
. This definition is correct since
,
and therefore the set
is nonempty.
The function
characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of deterministic decision trees for decision tables from
with the growth of the minimum weighted depth of nondeterministic decision trees for these tables.
Theorem 16 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. Then the function
is everywhere defined and
for any
.
First we prove the following statement.
Lemma 17 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a complete decision table from
. Then
.
Proof. If
or
has a common decision, then as it is not difficult to show,
and the considered inequality holds. Indeed, the equalities
follow in the case of
from the definitions, and in the case when
has a common decision they follow from the fact that we do not need to calculate the values of attributes to return this common decision. Let
be a nonempty decision table without common decisions. Let, for the definiteness,
have
columns labeled with attributes
. The set of rows of the table
coincides with the set of
-tuples from
. For any row
, we denote by
the only decision from the set of decisions attached to the row
in the table
.
We will say that a word
is inconsistent if it contains two letters of the kind
and
such that
. If the word
is not inconsistent it will be called consistent. It is easy to show that the table
is empty if and only if the word
is inconsistent.
Let
be a nondeterministic decision tree for the table
such that
. We denote by
the set of complete paths
from
for which the word
is consistent. Let’s assign each path from
a number from
so that different paths have different numbers. Two complete paths
will be called equivalent if
, i.e., their terminal nodes are labeled with the same number. The considered equivalence relation partitions the set
into equivalence classes
.
We now show that, for any complete paths
that are not equivalent, the word
is inconsistent. Let us assume the contrary. Then there is a row
of the table
, which belongs to both subtables
and
, but this is impossible since
.
Let us consider a row
of the table
. We now describe the work on the row
of a deterministic decision tree
for the table
. As a result, we obtain the description of a complete path
in the decision tree
such that the row
belongs to the subtable
. The set of complete paths of the decision tree
coincides with the set
.
Step 1. Set
and, for each
, set
. Move on to Step 2.
Step 2. This step consists of the three phases: (a), (b), and (c).
(a) If there is a complete path
for which the word
is empty, then the decision tree
finishes its work and returns the decision
, which will be attached to the terminal node of the path
. Otherwise, move on to (b).
(b) Set
the minimum index
from the set
for which
. Choose a complete path
with the minimum number. If
, then the tree
finishes its work and returns the decision
, which will be attached to the terminal node of the path
. Otherwise, move on to (c).
(c) Let
be all attributes from the letters of the word
. The decision tree
finds the values of attributes
and obtains that
. Set
. For each complete path
, we do the following. If the word
is inconsistent, then set
. Otherwise, set
where
denotes the word obtained from
by removal of all letters from the word
. Move on to Step 2.
It is clear that the row
belongs to the subtable
. We now show that the decision
attached to the terminal node of this path is a common decision for the subtable
. The two variants of finishing the work of the decision tree
are described in phases (a) and (b) of Step 2.
(a) There is a complete path
for which the word
is empty. In this case, the tree
finishes its work and returns the decision
, which will be attached to the terminal node of the path
. It is clear that the set of letters of the word
is a subset of the set of letters of the word
. Therefore the set of rows of the subtable
is a subset of the set of rows of the subtable
. From here it follows that the row
belongs to the subtable
. Since Γ is a nondeterministic decision tree for
and the subtable
is nonempty, the decision
is a common decision of the subtable
. Thus, the decision
is a common decision for the subtable
.
(b) There is no a complete path
for which the word
is empty and there is
for which
and
. Let
be a complete path from the set
with the minimum number. Then the tree
finishes its work and returns the decision
, which will be attached to the terminal node of the path
.
Since Γ is a nondeterministic decision tree for the table
, there is a complete path
such that the row
belongs to the subtable
. For this path,
. It is clear that the word
is consistent. Hence the path
belongs to the set
and therefore, to the set
. Thus, terminal nodes of the paths from
are labeled with the decision
. In particular,
.
We now show that
is a common decision of the subtable
. Assume the contrary. Then there exists a row
, which belongs to the subtable
and for which
. Since Γ is a nondeterministic decision tree for the table
, there is a complete path
such that row
belongs to the subtable
. It is clear that
and the word
is consistent. Hence, the path
belongs to the set Ξ and therefore, to the set
, but this is impossible since terminal nodes of all paths from
are labeled with the decision
and
.
As a result, we obtain that
is a deterministic decision tree for the table
.
It is obvious that during each complete repetition of Step 2, which includes phase (c), the decision tree
computes the values of attributes, which are attached to some working nodes of a complete path of
. Therefore the total weight of these attributes is at most
. Now we show that at most
complete repetitions of Step 2 are performed.
We know that, for any complete paths
that are not equivalent, the word
is inconsistent. Using this fact, one can show that after each complete repetition of Step 2, for each complete path
, this path will be removed from the set
or the length of the word
will decrease by at least 1. Evidently, for each complete path
, the length of the word
is at most
. Therefore, after
complete repetitions of Step 2, we will find a complete path
for which the word
is empty or we will have
. In both cases, the decision tree
will finish its work.
As a result, we obtain that, in the complete path
, we find values of a group of attributes, which total weight is at most
, at most
times. It is clear that
. Taking into account that we considered an arbitrary complete path in the decision tree
and
, we obtain
. Since
is a deterministic decision tree for the table
, we have
. □
Proof of Theorem 16. The statement of theorem follows from Lemma 17. □
5. Closed Classes of Complete Decision Tables with
0-1-Decisions
This section is based on Chapter 9 of the book [1] and the previous section of this paper. We obtain deeper results for the special case of weighted depth and closed classes of binary complete decision tables with 0-1-decisions. For the convenience of the reader, we try to follow the text of [1] as closely as possible.
In this section, we consider results obtained in the paper for the functions
,
,
,
, and
.
5.1. Function
Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. We now define a function
. Let
. Then
The function
characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of deterministic decision trees for decision tables from
with the growth of the total weight of attributes attached to columns of these tables.
Theorem 18 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. Then
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
. For this function, one of the following statements holds:
(a) If the function
is bounded from above on the class
, then there exists a positive constant
such that
for any
.
(b) If the function
is not bounded from above on the class
, then there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
.
Proof. From Theorem 9.1 [1] it follows that
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
.
(a) Let the function
be bounded from above on the class
by a positive constant
. Using Lemma 3, we obtain that the function
is bounded from above on the class
by
. Therefore
for any
. □
(b) Let the function
be not bounded from above on the class
. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 9.1 [1] it follows that there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
. □
For the depth
, the bound from the statement (b) of Theorem 18 can be improved.
Theorem 19 Let
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
for which the function
is not bounded from above. Then
for any
.
Proof. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 9.2 [1] it follows that
for any
. □
5.2. Function
Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. We now define a function
. Let
. Then
The function
characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of nondeterministic decision trees for decision tables from
with the growth of the total weight of attributes attached to columns of these tables.
Theorem 20 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. Then
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
. For this function, one of the following statements holds:
(a) If the function
is bounded from above on the class
, then there exists a positive constant
such that
for any
.
(b) If the function
is not bounded from above on the class
, then there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
.
First, we prove the following auxiliary statement.
Lemma 21 Let
be a nonempty complete decision table from
. Then there exists a complete decision table
from
, which is obtained from
by
-changing of decisions and for which
.
Proof. From Lemma 4 it follows that
. Let
be a row of the table
for which
. We denote by
a decision table obtained from
by changing of the sets of decisions attached to rows of
such that the row
is labeled with the set
and all other rows are labeled with the set
.
It is clear that
. We now show that
. Let Γ be a nondeterministic decision tree for the table
such that
,
be a complete path of Γ such that the row
belongs to the subtable
and
be attributes attached to working nodes of
. It is clear that
is the only row of the subtable
. Therefore in the set of columns of
labeled with attributes from the set
the row
is different from all other rows of the table
. Thus,
and
. As a result, we obtain
. By Lemmas 3 and 7,
. □
Proof of Theorem 20. Since
is a closed class,
. By definition,
. Using this fact and Lemmas 3 and 7, we obtain that
is an everywhere defined function and
for any
. Evidently,
is a nondecreasing function. Let
and
. It is clear that
. By definition,
. Therefore
.
(a) Let the function
be bounded from above on the class
by a positive constant
. Using Lemmas 3 and 7, we obtain that the function
is bounded from above on the class
by
. Therefore
for any
.
(b) Let the function
be not bounded from above on the class
. Using Lemma 12, we obtain that the set
is infinite. Since the class
is closed,
and, since
,
. Evidently, for any
,
. Taking into account that
is a nondecreasing function, we obtain that
for any
. □
For the depth
, the bound from the statement (b) of Theorem 20 can be improved.
Theorem 22 Let
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
for which the function
is not bounded from above. Then
for any
.
Proof. Since
is a closed class of complete decision tables from
for which the function
is not bounded from above, the class
contains for each
a complete table
such that
. Using Lemma 12, we obtain that the class
contains for each
a complete table
such that
. Therefore
for any
. Using Theorem 20, we obtain that
for any
. □
5.3. Function
Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. We now define possibly partial function
. Let
. If the set
is infinite, then the value
is undefined. Otherwise,
. This definition is correct since
,
and therefore the set
is nonempty.
The function
characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of deterministic decision trees for decision tables from
with the growth of the minimum weighted depth of nondeterministic decision trees for these tables.
Theorem 23 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. Then the function
is everywhere defined and
for any
.
Proof. The statement of theorem follows from Lemma 17. □
5.4. Function
Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. We now define a function
. Let
. Then
The function
characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of strongly nondeterministic decision trees for decision tables from
with the growth of the total weight of attributes attached to columns of these tables.
Theorem 24 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. Then
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
. For this function, one of the following statements holds:
(a) If the function
is bounded from above on the class
, then there exists a positive constant
such that
for any
.
(b) If the function
is not bounded from above on the class
, then there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
.
The next statement follows directly from Lemma 9.8 [1].
Lemma 25 For any weighted depth
and any complete table
from
,
Proof of Theorem 24. From Theorem 9.7 [1] it follows that
is an everywhere defined nondecreasing function such that
for any
and
.
(a) Let the function
be bounded from above on the class
by a positive constant
. Using Lemmas 3 and 25, we obtain that the function
is bounded from above on the class
by
. Therefore
for any
.
(b) Let the function
be not bounded from above on the class
. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 9.7 [1] it follows that there exists an infinite subset
of the set
such that
for any
. □
For the depth
, the bound from the statement (b) of Theorem 24 can be improved.
Theorem 26 Let
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
for which the function
is not bounded from above. Then
for any
.
Proof. Using Lemma 4, we obtain that the function
is not bounded from above on the class
. From here and from Theorem 9.8 [1] it follows that
for any
. □
5.5. Function
Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. We now define possibly partial function
. Let
. If the set
is infinite, then the value
is undefined. Otherwise,
. This definition is correct since
,
and therefore the set
is nonempty. From here it follows that if the value
is defined, then
.
The function
characterizes the growth in the worst case of the minimum weighted depth of deterministic decision trees for decision tables from
with the growth of the minimum weighted depth of strongly nondeterministic decision trees for these tables.
We now remind the definition of possibly partial function
. Let
. If the set
is infinite, then the value
is undefined. Otherwise,
. This definition is correct since
,
and therefore the set
is nonempty. It is clear that
. Therefore
.
The following statement describes a criterion for the function
to be everywhere defined.
Theorem 27 Let
be a weighted depth and
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
. Then the function
is everywhere defined if and only if the function
is everywhere defined.
First, we prove two auxiliary statements.
Lemma 28 Let
be a weighted depth,
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
, and the function
be everywhere defined. Then the function
is everywhere defined and
for any
.
Proof. Let
and
be a table from the class
for which
. Let us show that
. If
is empty or has a common decision, then, as it is easy to show,
and the considered inequality holds.
Let
be a nonempty table without common decisions and Γ be a strongly nondeterministic decision tree for
such that
. It is clear that
. Let
. We now define a deterministic decision tree
for the table
. This tree sequentially computes values of the attributes
. The set of words
corresponding to complete paths
of
coincides with the set
. It is clear that, for any row of
, there exists a complete path
of
such that this row belongs to the subtable
. Let us consider an arbitrary complete path
of
with
. If there exists a complete path
of Γ such that the word
is consistent, then the terminal node of
is labeled with the decision 1. Otherwise, this node is labeled with the decision 0. It is easy to check that the subtable
is nonempty and the decision attached to the terminal node of
is the common decision for this subtable. Thus, the tree
is a deterministic decision tree for the table
.
Since
, for any
,
. Using the fact that
is a closed class, we obtain
. Therefore
and
. Thus, for any table
such that
, the inequality
holds. As a result, we obtain that the value
is defined and
. □
Lemma 29 For any
, there exists a complete decision table
from
such that
,
and
.
Proof. Let
. We denote by
a complete decision table from
with
columns labeled with the attributes
in which the row
is labeled with the set of decisions
and all other rows are labeled with the set of decisions
.
We denote by Γ a strongly nondeterministic decision tree for
in which the set of words
for complete paths
of Γ coincides with the set
and the terminal node of each complete path is labeled with the decision 1. One can show that, for each row
of the table
labeled with the set of decisions
, there exists a complete path
of Γ, for which the row
belongs to the subtable
, and, for each complete path
of Γ, 1 is the common decision for the subtable
. It is clear that
. Therefore
.
Let
be a deterministic decision tree for the table
for which
. Then
contains a complete path
such that the row
of the table
belongs to the subtable
. Then the terminal node of
is labeled with the decision 0 and 0 is the common decision for the table
. We now show that the set of letters of the word
coincides with the set
. Assume the contrary: a letter
for some
does not belong to the set of letters of the word
. Then, evidently, the row
containing only one unit in the ith digit belongs to the subtable
but this is impossible. Therefore the length of the word
is at least
,
and
. □
Proof of Theorem 27. Let the function
be everywhere defined. Then, by Lemma 28, the function
is everywhere defined.
Let the function
be not everywhere defined. Then there exists a number
for which the value
is undefined. From here and from Lemma 29 it follows that, for any
, there exists a complete decision table
such that
,
,
and
. Since
and
,
. It is clear that
. As a result, we obtain that the set
is infinite and the value
is undefined. □
The next statement clarifies the behavior of everywhere defined function
.
Theorem 30 Let
be a weighted depth,
be a nontrivial closed class of complete decision tables from
, and the function
be everywhere defined. Then
(a) For any
,
.
(b) A polynomial
such that
for any
exists if and only if there exists a polynomial
such that
for any
.
Proof. (a) Using Theorem 27, we obtain that the function
is everywhere defined. From here and from Lemma 28 it follows that
for any
.
We now show that
for any
. If
, then, evidently,
. Let
and
. From Lemma 29 it follows that there exists a complete decision table
such that
,
,
and
. Since
and
,
. It is clear that
. Therefore
.
(b) Let there exist a polynomial
such that
for any
. From part (a) of the theorem statement it follows that
for any
. Therefore there exists a polynomial
such that
for any
.
Let there be no a polynomial
such that
for any
. We now show that there is no a polynomial
such that
for any
. Assume the contrary: there exists a polynomial
such that
for any
. From part (a) of the theorem statement it follows that
for any
. Therefore
for any
. Thus, there exists a polynomial
such that
for any
, but this is impossible. □
6. Conclusion
In this paper, we considered three types of closed classes of binary complete decision tables with many-valued decisions and studied for tables from these classes functions describing relationships among the minimum weighted depth of deterministic decision trees, the minimum weighted depth of nondeterministic decision trees, the minimum weighted depth of strongly nondeterministic decision trees, and the total weight of attributes attached to columns of the tables. Our goal was to simplify the criteria for the behavior of these functions compared to the criteria considered in the book [1] and to obtain new results for relationships between deterministic and nondeterministic decision trees. The obtained results can be useful for the study of various problems of transforming decision rule systems with binary attributes into decision trees [1]. In the future, we plan to conduct similar studies for closed classes of
-valued complete decision tables, where
.
Acknowledgements
Research reported in this publication was supported by King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST). We are very grateful to the anonymous reviewer for helpful comments and suggestions.