96 lines
		
	
	
		
			3.4 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			96 lines
		
	
	
		
			3.4 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
	
	
	
	
.. _wine_dataset:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Wine recognition dataset
 | 
						|
------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
**Data Set Characteristics:**
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    :Number of Instances: 178
 | 
						|
    :Number of Attributes: 13 numeric, predictive attributes and the class
 | 
						|
    :Attribute Information:
 | 
						|
 		- Alcohol
 | 
						|
 		- Malic acid
 | 
						|
 		- Ash
 | 
						|
		- Alcalinity of ash  
 | 
						|
 		- Magnesium
 | 
						|
		- Total phenols
 | 
						|
 		- Flavanoids
 | 
						|
 		- Nonflavanoid phenols
 | 
						|
 		- Proanthocyanins
 | 
						|
		- Color intensity
 | 
						|
 		- Hue
 | 
						|
 		- OD280/OD315 of diluted wines
 | 
						|
 		- Proline
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    - class:
 | 
						|
            - class_0
 | 
						|
            - class_1
 | 
						|
            - class_2
 | 
						|
		
 | 
						|
    :Summary Statistics:
 | 
						|
    
 | 
						|
    ============================= ==== ===== ======= =====
 | 
						|
                                   Min   Max   Mean     SD
 | 
						|
    ============================= ==== ===== ======= =====
 | 
						|
    Alcohol:                      11.0  14.8    13.0   0.8
 | 
						|
    Malic Acid:                   0.74  5.80    2.34  1.12
 | 
						|
    Ash:                          1.36  3.23    2.36  0.27
 | 
						|
    Alcalinity of Ash:            10.6  30.0    19.5   3.3
 | 
						|
    Magnesium:                    70.0 162.0    99.7  14.3
 | 
						|
    Total Phenols:                0.98  3.88    2.29  0.63
 | 
						|
    Flavanoids:                   0.34  5.08    2.03  1.00
 | 
						|
    Nonflavanoid Phenols:         0.13  0.66    0.36  0.12
 | 
						|
    Proanthocyanins:              0.41  3.58    1.59  0.57
 | 
						|
    Colour Intensity:              1.3  13.0     5.1   2.3
 | 
						|
    Hue:                          0.48  1.71    0.96  0.23
 | 
						|
    OD280/OD315 of diluted wines: 1.27  4.00    2.61  0.71
 | 
						|
    Proline:                       278  1680     746   315
 | 
						|
    ============================= ==== ===== ======= =====
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    :Missing Attribute Values: None
 | 
						|
    :Class Distribution: class_0 (59), class_1 (71), class_2 (48)
 | 
						|
    :Creator: R.A. Fisher
 | 
						|
    :Donor: Michael Marshall (MARSHALL%PLU@io.arc.nasa.gov)
 | 
						|
    :Date: July, 1988
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This is a copy of UCI ML Wine recognition datasets.
 | 
						|
https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/machine-learning-databases/wine/wine.data
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The data is the results of a chemical analysis of wines grown in the same
 | 
						|
region in Italy by three different cultivators. There are thirteen different
 | 
						|
measurements taken for different constituents found in the three types of
 | 
						|
wine.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Original Owners: 
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Forina, M. et al, PARVUS - 
 | 
						|
An Extendible Package for Data Exploration, Classification and Correlation. 
 | 
						|
Institute of Pharmaceutical and Food Analysis and Technologies,
 | 
						|
Via Brigata Salerno, 16147 Genoa, Italy.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Citation:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Lichman, M. (2013). UCI Machine Learning Repository
 | 
						|
[https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml]. Irvine, CA: University of California,
 | 
						|
School of Information and Computer Science. 
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
.. topic:: References
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  (1) S. Aeberhard, D. Coomans and O. de Vel, 
 | 
						|
  Comparison of Classifiers in High Dimensional Settings, 
 | 
						|
  Tech. Rep. no. 92-02, (1992), Dept. of Computer Science and Dept. of  
 | 
						|
  Mathematics and Statistics, James Cook University of North Queensland. 
 | 
						|
  (Also submitted to Technometrics). 
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  The data was used with many others for comparing various 
 | 
						|
  classifiers. The classes are separable, though only RDA 
 | 
						|
  has achieved 100% correct classification. 
 | 
						|
  (RDA : 100%, QDA 99.4%, LDA 98.9%, 1NN 96.1% (z-transformed data)) 
 | 
						|
  (All results using the leave-one-out technique) 
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  (2) S. Aeberhard, D. Coomans and O. de Vel, 
 | 
						|
  "THE CLASSIFICATION PERFORMANCE OF RDA" 
 | 
						|
  Tech. Rep. no. 92-01, (1992), Dept. of Computer Science and Dept. of 
 | 
						|
  Mathematics and Statistics, James Cook University of North Queensland. 
 | 
						|
  (Also submitted to Journal of Chemometrics).
 |