No, this is absolutely incorrect. The result of a data mining operation is a statistical model: code, essentially, not data. The whole point of performing data mining is to be able to make inferences about future behavior.
As an example, below is a (denatured) model I recently produced for a bank. The goal was to predict whether individual customers will repay loans. In this case, it is a logistic regression run over a single table of data. The resulting code is intended to generate predictions (probability estimates) about future cases, not summarizing old ones:
Oh, I didn't really mean it that way, but to me the compiled trend predictions are essentially a "report", at least that's the way I present them here, i.e. "here's the prediction analysis report on the old ladies who don't pay their bills on time".
Actually I'm just old and cranky and like to argue!
My favorite thing is to bait people into telling me what was the first relational database system, after a quick google they usually come back and say "IBM's System R from the 70s" Wrong! The ancient Egyptians had one 4,000 years ago, not computer based obviously, but one nonetheless.
I'm rambling I'll stop now.
If more than 1 goose are geese, why aren't more than 1 moose meese??
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.