# Intelligent Decision: Towards Interpreting The פ Algorithm

| Ching-an Hsiao   | Xinchun Tian   |
|------------------|----------------|

tca.hsiao@gmail.com tianxc@fnal.gov

## Abstract:

The human intelligence lies in the algorithm, the nature of algorithm lies in the classification, and the classification is equal to outlier detection. A lot of algorithms have been proposed to detect outliers, meanwhile a lot of definitions. Unsatisfying point is that definitions seem vague, which makes the solution an ad hoc one. We analyzed the nature of outliers, and give two clear definitions. We then develop an efficient RDD algorithm, which converts outlier problem to pattern and degree problem. Furthermore, a collapse mechanism was introduced by IIR algorithm, which can be united seamlessly with the RDD algorithm and serve for the final decision. Both algorithms are originated from the study on general AI. The combined edition is named as פ algorithm, which is the basis of the intelligent decision. Here we introduce longest k–turn subsequence problem and corresponding solution as an example to interpret the function of פ algorithm in detecting curve-type outliers. We also give a comparison between IIR algorithm and פ algorithm, where we can get a better understanding at both algorithms. A short discussion about intelligence is added to demonstrate the function of the פ algorithm. Related experimental results indicate its robustness. Keywords: Curve, Integrated Inconsistent Rate, classification, Pattern, Relative Deviation Degree

## 1. Introduction

Classification is the foundation of the intelligence, and the science tries to do it in a reasonable way. But "reasonable" is a very vague description, which makes the nature of science often be neglected by people. Science, in its origin, means knowledge, and now its scope is defined to things repeatable and observable. Scientists can mainly be divided into two groups. One is realist, and the other is instrumentalist. The instrumentalist keeps open to the world, and is not willing to presuppose, while the realist believes the objectivity set by the mind, so instrumentalist keeps a more consistent scientific idea. Although there is no mechanism to guarantee the known science to be repeatable forever, we are willing to believe it, which is also a kind of presupposition. It indicates that to most people, prior knowledge is above the science. An interesting example is about the global warming. With the same evidence (science), people tend to interpret in an opposite way. It is very dangerous when we doubt the science by motives. What we are worrying is the danger of authority abuse and the false union of inconsistent information. The rules underlying the nature 