Cloud-to-Cloud Integration ( C2I ) allows users to connect disparate cloud computing platforms. While Paas (Platform as a service) and Saas (Software as a service) continue to gain momentum, different vendors have different implementations for cloud computing, e.g. Database, REST, SOAP API. Another name for Cloud-to-Cloud Integration is Cloud-Surfing. See also Cloud-based integration
Stairstep interpolation
In the field of image processing, stairstep interpolation is a widely employed method technique for interpolating pixels after enlarging an image. The fundamental concept is to interpolate multiple times, in small increments, using any interpolation algorithm that is better than nearest-neighbor interpolation such as; bilinear interpolation, and bicubic interpolation. A common scenario is to interpolate an image by using a bicubic interpolation which increases the image size by no more than 10% (110% of the original size) at a time until the desired size is reached. Fred Miranda, a developer, popularized this method by creating and developing several Photoshop plug-ins that incorporate this technique. == Example ==
Correspondence analysis
Correspondence analysis (CA) is a multivariate statistical technique proposed by Herman Otto Hartley (Hirschfeld) and later developed by Jean-Paul Benzécri. It is conceptually similar to principal component analysis, but applies to categorical rather than continuous data. In a manner similar to principal component analysis, it provides a means of displaying or summarising a set of data in two-dimensional graphical form. Its aim is to display in a biplot any structure hidden in the multivariate setting of the data table. As such it is a technique from the field of multivariate ordination. Since the variant of CA described here can be applied either with a focus on the rows or on the columns it should in fact be called simple (symmetric) correspondence analysis. It is traditionally applied to the contingency table of a pair of nominal variables where each cell contains either a count or a zero value. If more than two categorical variables are to be summarized, a variant called multiple correspondence analysis should be chosen instead. CA may also be applied to binary data given the presence/absence coding represents simplified count data i.e. a 1 describes a positive count and 0 stands for a count of zero. Depending on the scores used CA preserves the chi-square distance between either the rows or the columns of the table. Because CA is a descriptive technique, it can be applied to tables regardless of a significant chi-squared test. Although the χ 2 {\displaystyle \chi ^{2}} statistic used in inferential statistics and the chi-square distance are computationally related they should not be confused since the latter works as a multivariate statistical distance measure in CA while the χ 2 {\displaystyle \chi ^{2}} statistic is in fact a scalar not a metric. == Details == Like principal components analysis, correspondence analysis creates orthogonal components (or axes) and, for each item in a table i.e. for each row, a set of scores (sometimes called factor scores, see Factor analysis). Correspondence analysis is performed on the data table, conceived as matrix C of size m × n where m is the number of rows and n is the number of columns. In the following mathematical description of the method capital letters in italics refer to a matrix while letters in italics refer to vectors. Understanding the following computations requires knowledge of matrix algebra. === Preprocessing === Before proceeding to the central computational step of the algorithm, the values in matrix C have to be transformed. First compute a set of weights for the columns and the rows (sometimes called masses), where row and column weights are given by the row and column vectors, respectively: w m = 1 n C C 1 , w n = 1 n C 1 T C . {\displaystyle w_{m}={\frac {1}{n_{C}}}C\mathbf {1} ,\quad w_{n}={\frac {1}{n_{C}}}\mathbf {1} ^{T}C.} Here n C = ∑ i = 1 n ∑ j = 1 m C i j {\displaystyle n_{C}=\sum _{i=1}^{n}\sum _{j=1}^{m}C_{ij}} is the sum of all cell values in matrix C, or short the sum of C, and 1 {\displaystyle \mathbf {1} } is a column vector of ones with the appropriate dimension. Put in simple words, w m {\displaystyle w_{m}} is just a vector whose elements are the row sums of C divided by the sum of C, and w n {\displaystyle w_{n}} is a vector whose elements are the column sums of C divided by the sum of C. The weights are transformed into diagonal matrices W m = diag ( 1 / w m ) {\displaystyle W_{m}=\operatorname {diag} (1/{\sqrt {w_{m}}})} and W n = diag ( 1 / w n ) {\displaystyle W_{n}=\operatorname {diag} (1/{\sqrt {w_{n}}})} where the diagonal elements of W n {\displaystyle W_{n}} are 1 / w n {\displaystyle 1/{\sqrt {w_{n}}}} and those of W m {\displaystyle W_{m}} are 1 / w m {\displaystyle 1/{\sqrt {w_{m}}}} respectively i.e. the vector elements are the inverses of the square roots of the masses. The off-diagonal elements are all 0. Next, compute matrix P {\displaystyle P} by dividing C {\displaystyle C} by its sum P = 1 n C C . {\displaystyle P={\frac {1}{n_{C}}}C.} In simple words, Matrix P {\displaystyle P} is just the data matrix (contingency table or binary table) transformed into portions i.e. each cell value is just the cell portion of the sum of the whole table. Finally, compute matrix S {\displaystyle S} , sometimes called the matrix of standardized residuals, by matrix multiplication as S = W m ( P − w m w n ) W n {\displaystyle S=W_{m}(P-w_{m}w_{n})W_{n}} Note, the vectors w m {\displaystyle w_{m}} and w n {\displaystyle w_{n}} are combined in an outer product resulting in a matrix of the same dimensions as P {\displaystyle P} . In words the formula reads: matrix outer ( w m , w n ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {outer} (w_{m},w_{n})} is subtracted from matrix P {\displaystyle P} and the resulting matrix is scaled (weighted) by the diagonal matrices W m {\displaystyle W_{m}} and W n {\displaystyle W_{n}} . Multiplying the resulting matrix by the diagonal matrices is equivalent to multiply the i-th row (or column) of it by the i-th element of the diagonal of W m {\displaystyle W_{m}} or W n {\displaystyle W_{n}} , respectively. === Interpretation of preprocessing === The vectors w m {\displaystyle w_{m}} and w n {\displaystyle w_{n}} are the row and column masses or the marginal probabilities for the rows and columns, respectively. Subtracting matrix outer ( w m , w n ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {outer} (w_{m},w_{n})} from matrix P {\displaystyle P} is the matrix algebra version of double centering the data. Multiplying this difference by the diagonal weighting matrices results in a matrix containing weighted deviations from the origin of a vector space. This origin is defined by matrix outer ( w m , w n ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {outer} (w_{m},w_{n})} . In fact matrix outer ( w m , w n ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {outer} (w_{m},w_{n})} is identical with the matrix of expected frequencies in the chi-squared test. Therefore S {\displaystyle S} is computationally related to the independence model used in that test. But since CA is not an inferential method the term independence model is inappropriate here. === Orthogonal components === The table S {\displaystyle S} is then decomposed by a singular value decomposition as S = U Σ V ∗ {\displaystyle S=U\Sigma V^{}\,} where U {\displaystyle U} and V {\displaystyle V} are the left and right singular vectors of S {\displaystyle S} and Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is a square diagonal matrix with the singular values σ i {\displaystyle \sigma _{i}} of S {\displaystyle S} on the diagonal. Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is of dimension p ≤ ( min ( m , n ) − 1 ) {\displaystyle p\leq (\min(m,n)-1)} hence U {\displaystyle U} is of dimension m×p and V {\displaystyle V} is of n×p. As orthonormal vectors U {\displaystyle U} and V {\displaystyle V} fulfill U ∗ U = V ∗ V = I {\displaystyle U^{}U=V^{}V=I} . In other words, the multivariate information that is contained in C {\displaystyle C} as well as in S {\displaystyle S} is now distributed across two (coordinate) matrices U {\displaystyle U} and V {\displaystyle V} and a diagonal (scaling) matrix Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } . The vector space defined by them has as number of dimensions p, that is the smaller of the two values, number of rows and number of columns, minus 1. === Inertia === While a principal component analysis may be said to decompose the (co)variance, and hence its measure of success is the amount of (co-)variance covered by the first few PCA axes - measured in eigenvalue -, a CA works with a weighted (co-)variance which is called inertia. The sum of the squared singular values is the total inertia I {\displaystyle \mathrm {I} } of the data table, computed as I = ∑ i = 1 p σ i 2 . {\displaystyle \mathrm {I} =\sum _{i=1}^{p}\sigma _{i}^{2}.} The total inertia I {\displaystyle \mathrm {I} } of the data table can also computed directly from S {\displaystyle S} as I = ∑ i = 1 n ∑ j = 1 m s i j 2 . {\displaystyle \mathrm {I} =\sum _{i=1}^{n}\sum _{j=1}^{m}s_{ij}^{2}.} The amount of inertia covered by the i-th set of singular vectors is ι i {\displaystyle \iota _{i}} , the principal inertia. The higher the portion of inertia covered by the first few singular vectors i.e. the larger the sum of the principal inertiae in comparison to the total inertia, the more successful a CA is. Therefore, all principal inertia values are expressed as portion ϵ i {\displaystyle \epsilon _{i}} of the total inertia ϵ i = σ i 2 / ∑ i = 1 p σ i 2 {\displaystyle \epsilon _{i}=\sigma _{i}^{2}/\sum _{i=1}^{p}\sigma _{i}^{2}} and are presented in the form of a scree plot. In fact a scree plot is just a bar plot of all principal inertia portions ϵ i {\displaystyle \epsilon _{i}} . === Coordinates === To transform the singular vectors to coordinates which preserve the chi-square distances between rows or columns an additional weighting step is necessary. The resulting coordinates are called principal coordinates in CA text books. If principal coordinates are used for
NOMINATE (scaling method)
NOMINATE (an acronym for nominal three-step estimation) is a multidimensional scaling application developed by US political scientists Keith T. Poole and Howard Rosenthal in the early 1980s to analyze preferential and choice data, such as legislative roll-call voting behavior. In its most well-known application, members of the US Congress are placed on a two-dimensional map, with politicians who are ideologically similar (i.e. who often vote the same) being close together. One of these two dimensions corresponds to the familiar left–right political spectrum (liberal–conservative in the United States). As computing capabilities grew, Poole and Rosenthal developed multiple iterations of their NOMINATE procedure: the original D-NOMINATE method, W-NOMINATE, and most recently DW-NOMINATE (for dynamic, weighted NOMINATE). In 2009, Poole and Rosenthal were the first recipients of the Society for Political Methodology's Best Statistical Software Award for their development of NOMINATE. In 2016, the society awarded Poole its Career Achievement Award, stating that "the modern study of the U.S. Congress would be simply unthinkable without NOMINATE legislative roll call voting scores." == Procedure == The main procedure is an application of multidimensional scaling techniques to political choice data. Though there are important technical differences between these types of NOMINATE scaling procedures, all operate under the same fundamental assumptions. First, that alternative choices can be projected on a basic, low-dimensional (often two-dimensional) Euclidean space. Second, within that space, individuals have utility functions which are bell-shaped (normally distributed), and maximized at their ideal point. Because individuals also have symmetric, single-peaked utility functions which center on their ideal point, ideal points represent individuals' most preferred outcomes. That is, individuals most desire outcomes closest their ideal point, and will choose/vote probabilistically for the closest outcome. Ideal points can be recovered from observing choices, with individuals exhibiting similar preferences placed more closely than those behaving dissimilarly. It is helpful to compare this procedure to producing maps based on driving distances between cities. For example, Los Angeles is about 1,800 miles from St. Louis; St. Louis is about 1,200 miles from Miami; and Miami is about 2,700 miles from Los Angeles. From this (dis)similarities data, any map of these three cities should place Miami far from Los Angeles, with St. Louis somewhere in between (though a bit closer to Miami than Los Angeles). Just as cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco would be clustered on a map, NOMINATE places ideologically similar legislators (e.g., liberal Senators Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Al Franken (D-Minn.)) closer to each other, and farther from dissimilar legislators (e.g., conservative Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)) based on the degree of agreement between their roll call voting records. At the heart of the NOMINATE procedures (and other multidimensional scaling methods, such as Poole's Optimal Classification method) are algorithms they utilize to arrange individuals and choices in low dimensional (usually two-dimensional) space. Thus, NOMINATE scores provide "maps" of legislatures. Using NOMINATE procedures to study congressional roll call voting behavior from the First Congress to the present-day, Poole and Rosenthal published Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting in 1997 and the revised edition Ideology and Congress in 2007. In 2009, Poole and Rosenthal were named the first recipients of the Society for Political Methodology's Best Statistical Software Award for their development of NOMINATE, a recognition conferred to "individual(s) for developing statistical software that makes a significant research contribution". In 2016, Keith T. Poole was awarded the Society for Political Methodology's Career Achievement Award. The citation for this award reads, in part, "One can say perfectly correctly, and without any hyperbole: the modern study of the U.S. Congress would be simply unthinkable without NOMINATE legislative roll call voting scores. NOMINATE has produced data that entire bodies of our discipline—and many in the press—have relied on to understand the U.S. Congress." == Dimensions == Poole and Rosenthal demonstrate that—despite the many complexities of congressional representation and politics—roll call voting in both the House and the Senate can be organized and explained by no more than two dimensions throughout the sweep of American history. The first dimension (horizontal or x-axis) is the familiar left-right (or liberal-conservative) spectrum on economic matters. The second dimension (vertical or y-axis) picks up attitudes on cross-cutting, salient issues of the day (which include or have included slavery, bimetallism, civil rights, regional, and social/lifestyle issues). Rosenthal and Poole have initially argued that the first dimension refers to socio-economic matters and the second dimension to race-relations. However, the often confusing and residual nature of the second dimension has led to the second dimension being largely ignored by other researchers. For the most part, congressional voting is uni-dimensional, with most of the variation in voting patterns explained by placement along the liberal-conservative first dimension. While the first dimension of the DW-NOMINATE score is able to predict results at 83% accuracy, the addition of the second dimension only increases accuracy to 85%. Furthermore, the second dimension only provided a significant increase in accuracy for Congresses 1-99. As late as the 1990s, the second dimension was able to measure partisan splits in abortion and gun rights issues. However, a 2017 analysis found that since 1987, the votes of the US Congress had best fit a one-dimensional model, suggesting increasing party polarization after 1987. == Interpretation of nominate scores == For illustrative purposes, consider the following plots which use W-NOMINATE scores to scale members of Congress and uses the probabilistic voting model (in which legislators farther from the "cutting line" between "yea" and "nay" outcomes become more likely to vote in the predicted manner) to illustrate some major Congressional votes in the 1990s. Some of these votes, like the House's vote on President Clinton's welfare reform package (the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996) are best modeled through the use of the first (economic liberal-conservative) dimension. On the welfare reform vote, nearly all Republicans joined the moderate-conservative bloc of House Democrats in voting for the bill, while opposition was virtually confined to the most liberal Democrats in the House. The errors (those representatives on the "wrong" side of the cutting line which separates predicted "yeas" and predicted "nays") are generally close to the cutting line, which is what we would expect. A legislator directly on the cutting line is indifferent between voting "yea" and "nay" on the measure. All members are shown on the left panel of the plot, while only errors are shown on the right panel: Economic ideology also dominates the Senate vote on the Balanced Budget Amendment of 1995: On other votes, however, a second dimension (which has recently come to represent attitudes on cultural and lifestyle issues) is important. For example, roll call votes on gun control routinely split party coalitions, with socially conservative "blue dog" Democrats joining most Republicans in opposing additional regulation and socially liberal Republicans joining most Democrats in supporting gun control. The addition of the second dimension accounts for these inter-party differences, and the cutting line is more horizontal than vertical (meaning the cleavage is found on the second dimension rather than the first dimension on these votes) This pattern was evident in the 1991 House vote to require waiting periods on handguns: == Political ideology == DW-NOMINATE scores have been used widely to describe the political ideology of political actors, political parties and political institutions. For instance, a score in the first dimension that is close to either pole means that such score is located at one of the extremes in the liberal-conservative scale. So, a score closer to 1 is described as conservative whereas a score closer to −1 can be described as liberal. Finally, a score at zero or close to zero is described as moderate. == Political polarization == Poole and Rosenthal (beginning with their 1984 article "The Polarization of American Politics") have also used NOMINATE data to show that, since the 1970s, party delegations in Congress have become ideologically homogeneous and distant from one another (a phenomenon known as "polarization"). Using DW-NOMINATE scores (which permit direct comparisons between members of different Congress
ID3 algorithm
In decision tree learning, ID3 (Iterative Dichotomiser 3) is a greedy algorithm invented by Ross Quinlan used to generate a decision tree from a dataset. ID3 is the precursor to the C4.5 algorithm. The 3 in the name is meant to signify that this was Quinlan's third attempt at a model based on entropy-based splitting, and the term dichotimser is a misnomer as it implies a binary split, but the ID3 algorithm can split on multi-valued attributes. == Algorithm == The ID3 algorithm begins with the original set S {\displaystyle S} as the root node. On each iteration of the algorithm, it iterates through every unused attribute of the set S {\displaystyle S} and calculates the entropy H ( S ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {H} {(S)}} or the information gain I G ( S ) {\displaystyle IG(S)} of that attribute. It then selects the attribute which has the smallest entropy (or largest information gain) value. The set S {\displaystyle S} is then split or partitioned by the selected attribute to produce subsets of the data. (For example, a node can be split into child nodes based upon the subsets of the population whose ages are less than 50, between 50 and 100, and greater than 100.) The algorithm continues to recurse on each subset, considering only attributes never selected before. Recursion on a subset may stop in one of these cases: every element in the subset belongs to the same class; in which case the node is turned into a leaf node and labelled with the class of the examples. there are no more attributes to be selected, but the examples still do not belong to the same class. In this case, the node is made a leaf node and labelled with the most common class of the examples in the subset. there are no examples in the subset, which happens when no example in the parent set was found to match a specific value of the selected attribute. An example could be the absence of a person among the population with age over 100 years. Then a leaf node is created and labelled with the most common class of the examples in the parent node's set. Throughout the algorithm, the decision tree is constructed with each non-terminal node (internal node) representing the selected attribute on which the data was split, and terminal nodes (leaf nodes) representing the class label of the final subset of this branch. === Summary === Calculate the entropy of every attribute a {\displaystyle a} of the data set S {\displaystyle S} . Partition ("split") the set S {\displaystyle S} into subsets using the attribute for which the resulting entropy after splitting is minimized; or, equivalently, information gain is maximum. Make a decision tree node containing that attribute. Recurse on subsets using the remaining attributes. === Properties === ID3 does not guarantee an optimal solution. It can converge upon local optima. It uses a greedy strategy by selecting the locally best attribute to split the dataset on each iteration. The algorithm's optimality can be improved by using backtracking during the search for the optimal decision tree at the cost of possibly taking longer. ID3 can overfit the training data. To avoid overfitting, smaller decision trees should be preferred over larger ones. This algorithm usually produces small trees, but it does not always produce the smallest possible decision tree. ID3 is harder to use on continuous data than on factored data (factored data has a discrete number of possible values, thus reducing the possible branch points). If the values of any given attribute are continuous, then there are many more places to split the data on this attribute, and searching for the best value to split by can be time-consuming. === Usage === The ID3 algorithm is used by training on a data set S {\displaystyle S} to produce a decision tree which is stored in memory. At runtime, this decision tree is used to classify new test cases (feature vectors) by traversing the decision tree using the features of the datum to arrive at a leaf node. == The ID3 metrics == === Entropy === Entropy H ( S ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {H} {(S)}} is a measure of the amount of uncertainty in the (data) set S {\displaystyle S} (i.e. entropy characterizes the (data) set S {\displaystyle S} ). H ( S ) = ∑ x ∈ X − p ( x ) log 2 p ( x ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {H} {(S)}=\sum _{x\in X}{-p(x)\log _{2}p(x)}} Where, S {\displaystyle S} – The current dataset for which entropy is being calculated This changes at each step of the ID3 algorithm, either to a subset of the previous set in the case of splitting on an attribute or to a "sibling" partition of the parent in case the recursion terminated previously. X {\displaystyle X} – The set of classes in S {\displaystyle S} p ( x ) {\displaystyle p(x)} – The proportion of the number of elements in class x {\displaystyle x} to the number of elements in set S {\displaystyle S} When H ( S ) = 0 {\displaystyle \mathrm {H} {(S)}=0} , the set S {\displaystyle S} is perfectly classified (i.e. all elements in S {\displaystyle S} are of the same class). In ID3, entropy is calculated for each remaining attribute. The attribute with the smallest entropy is used to split the set S {\displaystyle S} on this iteration. Entropy in information theory measures how much information is expected to be gained upon measuring a random variable; as such, it can also be used to quantify the amount to which the distribution of the quantity's values is unknown. A constant quantity has zero entropy, as its distribution is perfectly known. In contrast, a uniformly distributed random variable (discretely or continuously uniform) maximizes entropy. Therefore, the greater the entropy at a node, the less information is known about the classification of data at this stage of the tree; and therefore, the greater the potential to improve the classification here. As such, ID3 is a greedy heuristic performing a best-first search for locally optimal entropy values. Its accuracy can be improved by preprocessing the data. === Information gain === Information gain I G ( A ) {\displaystyle IG(A)} is the measure of the difference in entropy from before to after the set S {\displaystyle S} is split on an attribute A {\displaystyle A} . In other words, how much uncertainty in S {\displaystyle S} was reduced after splitting set S {\displaystyle S} on attribute A {\displaystyle A} . I G ( S , A ) = H ( S ) − ∑ t ∈ T p ( t ) H ( t ) = H ( S ) − H ( S | A ) . {\displaystyle IG(S,A)=\mathrm {H} {(S)}-\sum _{t\in T}p(t)\mathrm {H} {(t)}=\mathrm {H} {(S)}-\mathrm {H} {(S|A)}.} Where, H ( S ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {H} (S)} – Entropy of set S {\displaystyle S} T {\displaystyle T} – The subsets created from splitting set S {\displaystyle S} by attribute A {\displaystyle A} such that S = ⋃ t ∈ T t {\displaystyle S=\bigcup _{t\in T}t} p ( t ) {\displaystyle p(t)} – The proportion of the number of elements in t {\displaystyle t} to the number of elements in set S {\displaystyle S} H ( t ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {H} (t)} – Entropy of subset t {\displaystyle t} In ID3, information gain can be calculated (instead of entropy) for each remaining attribute. The attribute with the largest information gain is used to split the set S {\displaystyle S} on this iteration.
Language Computer Corporation
Language Computer Corporation (LCC) is a natural language processing research company based in Richardson, Texas. The company develops a variety of natural language processing products, including software for question answering, information extraction, and automatic summarization. Since its founding in 1995, the low-profile company has landed significant United States Government contracts, with $8,353,476 in contracts in 2006-2008. While the company has focused primarily on the government software market, LCC has also used its technology to spin off three start-up companies. The first spin-off, known as Lymba Corporation, markets the PowerAnswer question answering product originally developed at LCC. In 2010, LCC's CEO, Andrew Hickl, co-founded two start-ups which made use of the company's technology. These included Swingly, an automatic question answering start-up, and Extractiv, an information extraction service that was founded in partnership with Houston, Texas-based 80legs.
Iris flower data set
The Iris flower data set or Fisher's Iris data set is a multivariate data set used and made famous by the British statistician and biologist Ronald Fisher in his 1936 paper The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems as an example of linear discriminant analysis. It is sometimes called Anderson's Iris data set because Edgar Anderson collected the data to quantify the morphologic variation of Iris flowers of three related species. Two of the three species were collected in the Gaspé Peninsula "all from the same pasture, and picked on the same day and measured at the same time by the same person with the same apparatus". The data set consists of 50 samples from each of three species of Iris (Iris setosa, Iris virginica and Iris versicolor). Four features were measured from each sample: the length and the width of the sepals and petals, in centimeters. Based on the combination of these four features, Fisher developed a linear discriminant model to distinguish each species. Fisher's paper was published in the Annals of Eugenics (today the Annals of Human Genetics). == Use of the data set == Originally used as an example data set on which Fisher's linear discriminant analysis was applied, it became a typical test case for many statistical classification techniques in machine learning such as support vector machines. The use of this data set in cluster analysis however is not common, since the data set only contains two clusters with rather obvious separation. One of the clusters contains Iris setosa, while the other cluster contains both Iris virginica and Iris versicolor and is not separable without the species information Fisher used. This makes the data set a good example to explain the difference between supervised and unsupervised techniques in data mining: Fisher's linear discriminant model can only be obtained when the object species are known: class labels and clusters are not necessarily the same. Nevertheless, all three species of Iris are separable in the projection on the nonlinear and branching principal component. The data set is approximated by the closest tree with some penalty for the excessive number of nodes, bending and stretching. Then the so-called "metro map" is constructed. The data points are projected into the closest node. For each node the pie diagram of the projected points is prepared. The area of the pie is proportional to the number of the projected points. It is clear from the diagram (left) that the absolute majority of the samples of the different Iris species belong to the different nodes. Only a small fraction of Iris-virginica is mixed with Iris-versicolor (the mixed blue-green nodes in the diagram). Therefore, the three species of Iris (Iris setosa, Iris virginica and Iris versicolor) are separable by the unsupervising procedures of nonlinear principal component analysis. To discriminate them, it is sufficient just to select the corresponding nodes on the principal tree. == Data set == The data set contains a set of 150 records under five attributes: sepal length, sepal width, petal length, petal width and species. The iris data set is widely used as a beginner's data set for machine learning purposes. The data set is included in R base and Python in the machine learning library scikit-learn, so that users can access it without having to find a source for it. Several versions of the data set have been published. === R code illustrating usage === The example R code shown below reproduce the scatterplot displayed at the top of this article: === Python code illustrating usage === This code gives: