Random Forests
Leo Breiman
- Vol. 45, Iss: 1, pp 5-32
TLDR
Internal estimates monitor error, strength, and correlation and these are used to show the response to increasing the number of features used in the forest, and are also applicable to regression.Abstract:
Random forests are a combination of tree predictors such that each tree depends on the values of a random vector sampled independently and with the same distribution for all trees in the forest. The generalization error for forests converges a.s. to a limit as the number of trees in the forest becomes large. The generalization error of a forest of tree classifiers depends on the strength of the individual trees in the forest and the correlation between them. Using a random selection of features to split each node yields error rates that compare favorably to Adaboost (Y. Freund & R. Schapire, Machine Learning: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International conference, aaa, 148–156), but are more robust with respect to noise. Internal estimates monitor error, strength, and correlation and these are used to show the response to increasing the number of features used in the splitting. Internal estimates are also used to measure variable importance. These ideas are also applicable to regression.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
QSAR Modeling: Where have you been? Where are you going to?
Artem Cherkasov,Eugene N. Muratov,Eugene N. Muratov,Denis Fourches,Alexandre Varnek,Igor I. Baskin,Mark T. D. Cronin,John C. Dearden,Paola Gramatica,Yvonne C. Martin,Roberto Todeschini,Viviana Consonni,Victor E. Kuz’min,Richard D. Cramer,Romualdo Benigni,Chihae Yang,James F. Rathman,Lothar Terfloth,Johann Gasteiger,Ann M. Richard,Alexander Tropsha +20 more
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide guidelines for QSAR development, validation, and application, which are summarized in best practices for building rigorously validated and externally predictive quantitative structure-activity relationship models.
Journal ArticleDOI
Recent advances and applications of machine learning in solid-state materials science
TL;DR: A comprehensive overview and analysis of the most recent research in machine learning principles, algorithms, descriptors, and databases in materials science, and proposes solutions and future research paths for various challenges in computational materials science.
Journal ArticleDOI
REVEL: An Ensemble Method for Predicting the Pathogenicity of Rare Missense Variants
Nilah M. Ioannidis,Joseph H. Rothstein,Joseph H. Rothstein,Vikas Pejaver,Sumit Middha,Shannon K. McDonnell,Saurabh Baheti,Anthony M. Musolf,Qing Li,Emily R. Holzinger,Danielle M. Karyadi,Lisa A. Cannon-Albright,Craig C. Teerlink,Janet L. Stanford,William B. Isaacs,Jianfeng Xu,Kathleen A. Cooney,Kathleen A. Cooney,Ethan M. Lange,Johanna Schleutker,John D. Carpten,Isaac J. Powell,Olivier Cussenot,Geraldine Cancel-Tassin,Graham G. Giles,Graham G. Giles,Robert J. MacInnis,Robert J. MacInnis,Christiane Maier,Chih-Lin Hsieh,Fredrik Wiklund,William J. Catalona,William D. Foulkes,Diptasri Mandal,Rosalind A. Eeles,Zsofia Kote-Jarai,Carlos Bustamante,Daniel J. Schaid,Trevor Hastie,Elaine A. Ostrander,Joan E. Bailey-Wilson,Predrag Radivojac,Stephen N. Thibodeau,Alice S. Whittemore,Weiva Sieh,Weiva Sieh +45 more
TL;DR: This work developed REVEL (rare exome variant ensemble learner), an ensemble method for predicting the pathogenicity of missense variants on the basis of individual tools: MutPred, FATHMM, VEST, PolyPhen, SIFT, PROVEAN, MutationAssessor, LRT, GERP, SiPhy, phyloP, and phastCons.
Journal ArticleDOI
Landslide inventory maps: New tools for an old problem
Fausto Guzzetti,Alessandro Cesare Mondini,Mauro Cardinali,Federica Fiorucci,Michele Santangelo,Kang-Tsung Chang +5 more
TL;DR: In this article, the authors outline the principles for landslide mapping, and review the conventional methods for the preparation of landslide maps, including geomorphological, event, seasonal, and multi-temporal inventories.
Drug Design, Development and Therapy
TL;DR: It is possible to predict which patients are at a higher risk of developing liver chemistry signals using pretreatment (baseline) data, and the type of analysis described here could help determine whether new biomarkers offer improved performance over established ones.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Bagging predictors
TL;DR: Tests on real and simulated data sets using classification and regression trees and subset selection in linear regression show that bagging can give substantial gains in accuracy.
Proceedings Article
Experiments with a new boosting algorithm
Yoav Freund,Robert E. Schapire +1 more
TL;DR: This paper describes experiments carried out to assess how well AdaBoost with and without pseudo-loss, performs on real learning problems and compared boosting to Breiman's "bagging" method when used to aggregate various classifiers.
Journal ArticleDOI
The random subspace method for constructing decision forests
TL;DR: A method to construct a decision tree based classifier is proposed that maintains highest accuracy on training data and improves on generalization accuracy as it grows in complexity.
Journal ArticleDOI
An Experimental Comparison of Three Methods for Constructing Ensembles of Decision Trees: Bagging, Boosting, and Randomization
TL;DR: In this article, the authors compared the effectiveness of randomization, bagging, and boosting for improving the performance of the decision-tree algorithm C4.5 and found that in situations with little or no classification noise, randomization is competitive with bagging but not as accurate as boosting.
Journal ArticleDOI
An Empirical Comparison of Voting Classification Algorithms: Bagging, Boosting, and Variants
Eric Bauer,Ron Kohavi +1 more
TL;DR: It is found that Bagging improves when probabilistic estimates in conjunction with no-pruning are used, as well as when the data was backfit, and that Arc-x4 behaves differently than AdaBoost if reweighting is used instead of resampling, indicating a fundamental difference.