Using color to visually represent an information.

Explain the advantages and two disadvantages of using color to visually represent information. Obtain one of the data sets available at the UCI Machine Learning…

Explain the advantages and two disadvantages of using color to visually represent information.

Obtain one of the data sets available at the UCI Machine Learning Repository and apply as many of the different visualization techniques described in the chapter as possible. The bibliographic notes and book Web site provide pointers to visualization software.Identify at least two advantages and two disadvantages of using color to visually represent information.What are the arrangement issues that arise with respect to three-dimensional plots?Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using sampling to reduce the number of data objects that need to be displayed. Would simple random sampling (without replacement) be a good approach to sampling? Why or why not?Describe how you would create visualizations to display information that de-scribes the following types of systems.a) Computer networks. Be sure to include both the static aspects of the network, such as connectivity, and the dynamic aspects, such as traffic.b) The distribution of specific plant and animal species around the world fora specific moment in time.c) The use of computer resources, such as processor time, main memory, and disk, for a set of benchmark database programs.d) The change in occupation of workers in a particular country over the last thirty years. Assume that you have yearly information about each person that also includes gender and level of education.Be sure to address the following issues:• Representation.How will you map objects, attributes, and relation-ships to visual elements?• Arrangement. Are there any special considerations that need to be taken into account with respect to how visual elements are displayed? Specific examples might be the choice of viewpoint, the use of transparency, or the separation of certain groups of objects.• Selection.How will you handle a large number of attributes and data objectsDescribe one advantage and one disadvantage of a stem and leaf plot with respect to a standard histogram.How might you address the problem that a histogram depends on the number and location of the bins?Describe how a box plot can give information about whether the value of an attribute is symmetrically distributed. What can you say about the symmetry of the distributions of the attributes shown in Figure 3.11?Compare sepal length, sepal width, petal length, and petal width, using Figure3.12.Comment on the use of a box plot to explore a data set with four attributes: age, weight, height, and income.Give a possible explanation as to why most of the values of petal length and width fall in the buckets along the diagonal in Figure 3.9.Use Figures 3.14 and 3.15 to identify a characteristic shared by the petal width and petal length attributes.Simple line plots, such as that displayed in Figure 2.12 on page 56, which shows two time series, can be used to effectively display high-dimensional data. For example, in Figure 2.12 it is easy to tell that the frequencies of the two time series are different. What characteristic of time series allows the effective visualization of high-dimensional data?Describe the types of situations that produce sparse or dense data cubes. Illustrate with examples other than those used in the book.How might you extend the notion of multidimensional data analysis so that the target variable is a qualitative variable? In other words, what sorts of summary statistics or data visualizations would be of interest?Construct a data cube from Table 3.14. Is this a dense or sparse data cube? If it is sparse, identify the cells that are empty.Discuss the differences between dimensionality reduction based on aggregation and dimensionality reduction based on techniques such as PCA and SVD.

PDF: https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/blackboard.learn.xythos.prod/5a31b16bb2c48/3150905?response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%2A%3DUTF-8%27%27chapter3_lesson.pdf&response-content-type=application%2Fpdf&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Date=20200515T035400Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=21600&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAIL7WQYDOOHAZJGWQ%2F20200515%2Fus-east-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Signature=b8c309c791f42492e6049a468ae4e66dc270625309cc2d82629e2332ed891fd4

Read Tan, Steinbach, & Kumar – Chapter 3 – Exploring Data

Sample Solution
Corpulence is characterized dependent on weight for length for youngsters 2 years: In kids ≥2 years old and young people a BMI >95th and 97th percentile is considered over-weight and corpulent individually. Shorts for overweight, corpulent and amazingly large are given in Table 1. TABLE1 Overweight Obese Extremely Obese BMI according to IAP BMI diagrams (5-18yr) ≥23 grown-up proportionate Percentile: young men 71st young ladies 75th ≥27 grown-up proportionate percentile: young men 90th young ladies 95th − BMI percentiles according to 2000 CDC diagrams (2-20yr) ≥85th to <95th ≥95th ≥120% of 95th Weight for length according to WHO diagrams (<2yr) − ≥97.7th percentile − Evaluation of corpulence and prescient components: Appraisal of heftiness is done based on BMI determined by weight/stature in m2 and plotting it on a BMI diagram. Sadly this parameter can’t consider the fit bulk of a person. Solid youngsters may likewise have a higher BMI and racial/ethnic contrasts have been found in the fat substance of people with similar BMI. Then again 25% kids with an ordinary BMI have abundance muscle to fat ratio. The danger of stoutness related confusions would be lower in kids with higher bulk than in those with higher adiposity. Higher fat substance and its appropriation, particularly focal adiposity connect better with the danger of heftiness related intricacies. Henceforth Waist outline might be a superior parameter for foreseeing intricacies. Since estimating WC can be dull for Pediatricians and most youngsters with high BMI do have overabundance muscle to fat ratio, BMI ought to be utilized for surveying heftiness. BMI outlines: IAP Charts: BMI outlines for Indian Children 5 to 18 years age were refreshed in 2015. The 23 and 27 grown-up equal shorts lines (for danger of overweight and stoutness, individually) are like the IOTF shorts and are increasingly proper for use in Asian youngsters since they are known to have greater adiposity and expanded cardio-metabolic hazard at a lower BMI (2). Subsequently it is desirable over utilize Indian IAP graphs for our populace 5-18years, WHO BMI outlines from 2-5yrs age and weight for stature diagrams by WHO for youngsters <2 yrs age. CDC diagrams: Children and young people ≥2 years old are analyzed as overweight if the BMI is ≥85th percentile yet <95th percentile and stout if the BMI is ≥95th percentile for age and sex on the updated 2000 CDC outlines. Outrageous heftiness is characterized as a BMI ≥120% of the 95th percentile or ≥35 kg/m2 (3). WHO BMI graphs are additionally accessible for youngsters <5years old enough. The regular course of BMI in youngsters shows an ascent in the main year of life, trailed by a fall and afterward a second ascent at around 6 years old, known as bounce back adiposity. It has been seen that if bounce back adiposity happens at a lower age, the odds of grown-up stoutness increment. Another examination recommends that BMI at 7 years old predicts grown-up stoutness (24 in audit). Studies on prescient factors needs more research as of now, however it is recommended that the focal point of Pediatricians ought to be on avoidance of corpulence as opposed to treatment. (audit article) Pervasiveness AND EPIDEMIOLOGY: Heftiness has become the main general medical issue on the planet and there is an ascent in predominance in creating nations. The quantity of large 5 to multi year olds rose more than ten times all inclusive, from 11 million of every 1975 to 124 million out of 2016. An extra 213 million were overweight in 2016. The quantity of overweight or corpulent youngsters matured 0 to 5 years expanded from 32 million all inclusive in 1990 to 41 million out of 2016. This proposes beginning of weight at a more youthful age is getting progressively common. In the course of the most recent decade there has been a developing concern in regards to the expanding predominance of overweight and corpulence among Indian young people. Predominance information of youth overweight and heftiness from 52 investigations led in 16 States in India were examined by WHO Centers in India. The pooled information after 2010 evaluated a consolidated pervasiveness of 19.3 percent of youth overweight and heftiness which was a critical increment from the prior predominance of 16.3 percent announced in 2001-2005 (4). ETIOLOGY Youth weight is a complex multifactorial malady brought about by the cooperation of hereditary and ecological elements. The commonest type of heftiness experienced is “Basic Obesity” that is because of ecological components. PATHOPHYSIOLOGY Proof recommends that corpulence is a confusion of the vitality homeostasis framework, as opposed to just emerging from the amassing of abundance weight. Heftiness, consequently happens when vitality admission is more than vitality consumption for example supported positive vitality balance. The homeostatic pathway of vitality balance comprises of: 1) Afferent arm: passes on fringe data on hunger digestion, as neural and hormonal contributions, to the nerve center 2) Central preparing unit: comprises of various zones inside the nerve center. The ventromedial nerve center (VMH) coordinates afferent fringe signals; Lateral hypothalamic territory (LHA) and paraventricular cores (PVN) fill in as synapse framework to adjust neural signs for changes in vitality consumption and taking care of. 3) Efferent arm: system of autonomic effectors, which control vitality consumption, stockpiling and admission. Interruption in any of these arms can modify vitality admission or consumption, prompting either cachexia or corpulence. Efferent yield The adipocyte hormone leptin, which circles at focuses corresponding to muscle versus fat substance, assumes a significant job in the connection among corpulence and vitality homeostasis. An insufficiency of leptin causes serious hyperphagia and weight, with physiological leptin substitution amends both hyperphagia and stoutness in leptin-inadequate people. However, most people with heftiness have raised plasma leptin levels, raising the likelihood that basic types of corpulence are related with leptin obstruction. 1. Way of life and diet: Absence of physical action is a significant supporter of youth stoutness. Advancement of mixed media, TV, web, computer games are connecting with the kid in stationary way of life. Guardians are currently increasingly cognizant about the scholarly presentation of the kid, because of which youngster’s physical movement is confined. As indicated by NHANES III (1988-1994), the predominance of youth weight is most elevated among kids who sit in front of the TV ≥4hours/day and least among the individuals who watch ≤1hour/day. A huge randomized control preliminary by Robinson(5) thought about two gatherings of youngsters at comparable government funded schools. One gathering got a 6-month study hall educational plan to diminish TV, tape, and computer game use, while the other gathering didn’t. Robinson found that contrasted with the benchmark group, youngsters in the mediation bunch had measurably critical decline in BMI. Beside these way of life issues, eating examples of kids and youths have changed drastically in the previous barely any decades. The utilization of unhealthy soda pops and low quality nourishment has expanded hugely. Kids who much of the time eat cheap food expend increasingly absolute and soaked fat, progressively all out starch and included sugars, less dietary fiber, less milk, and less products of the soil than youngsters who eat inexpensive food rarely. 2. Metabolic Programming: It has been settled that the metabolic programming of an individual decides the danger of creating corpulence. Proof for this originates from concentrates in which receptive kids and indistinguishable twins raised in various conditions had a BMI like their natural guardians/twin (6,7). Different variables that add to the metabolic writing computer programs are: – In utero condition or maternal nourishment – Birth weight (Small or Large for incubation) – Gestation (Term or preterm) 2. Social variables: Social components related with corpulence incorporate disregard, misuse, and for the most part non-steady home situations. Dismissed kids are multiple times bound to get large than other kids (8). Food gives comfort and in this manner that eating fills in as a compensatory instrument for kids who have endure horrible encounters or who live in troublesome situations. 3. Hereditary qualities: The present scourge of corpulence unmistakably mirrors the natural and conduct changes during the past 50 years, however the hereditary foundation stays significant, particularly in the serious types of stoutness. In the latest distributed update, there were in excess of 430 qualities, markers, and chromosomal districts related or connected with human heftiness phenotypes (9). The human corpulence quality guide uncovers that loci influencing heftiness related phenotypes are found on every single human chromosome with the exception of chromosome Y. The potential ramifications of hereditary factors in the improvement of stoutness is very much shown by the depiction of monogenic types of human corpulence. The qualities ensnared in these types of heftiness are summed up in Table 2. MC4R transformations are the most incessant reason for monogenic human heftiness, happening in up to 4% of beginning stage and serious youth stoutness (10,11). Homozygous changes of the leptin-melanocortin qualities are frequently connected with different highlights, for example hypogonadotropic hypogonadism in leptin insufficiency and red hair and hypocortisolism in POMC inadequacy. Hereditary Syndromes related with heftiness incorporate Prader-Willi, Bardet-Biedl, Berardinelli-Seip inherent lipodystrophy, Alstrom, Borjeson-Forssman-Lehmann, Cohen, Beckwith-Wiedemann, Carpenter Syndrome. TABLE 2 Hereditary Obesity Syndromes Developmental defer Inheritance Prader Willi disorder + AD Albright innate osteodystrophy + AD BDNF/TrkB inadequacy + AD SIM1 inadequacy + AD TUB inadequacy + AR Bardet-Biedl disorder + AR SH2B1 inadequacy – AD MC4R inadequacy – AD/AR KSR2 inadequacy – AD Alstrom disorder �>GET ANSWER Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Do you need any assistance with this question?
Send us your paper details now
We’ll find the best professional writer for you!

 



error: Content is protected !!