scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

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

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

BagBoosting for tumor classification with gene expression data

TL;DR: When bagging is used as a module in boosting, the resulting classifier consistently improves the predictive performance and the probability estimates of both bagging and boosting on real and simulated gene expression data.
Journal ArticleDOI

The Musicality of Non-Musicians: An Index for Assessing Musical Sophistication in the General Population

TL;DR: Occupation, occupational status, age, gender, and wealth are identified as the main socio-demographic factors associated with musical sophistication.
Proceedings ArticleDOI

Algorithmic Transparency via Quantitative Input Influence: Theory and Experiments with Learning Systems

TL;DR: The transparency-privacy tradeoff is explored and it is proved that a number of useful transparency reports can be made differentially private with very little addition of noise.
Journal ArticleDOI

Agricultural intensification reduces microbial network complexity and the abundance of keystone taxa in roots

TL;DR: It is demonstrated that agricultural intensification reduces network complexity and the abundance of keystone taxa in the root microbiome, and this is the first study to report mycorrhizal keystoneTaxa for agroecosystems.
Journal ArticleDOI

Predictive compound accumulation rules yield a broad-spectrum antibiotic

TL;DR: These guidelines were then applied to convert deoxynybomycin, a natural product that is active only against Gram-positive organisms, into an antibiotic with activity against a diverse panel of multi-drug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Bagging predictors

Leo Breiman
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

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

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.
Related Papers (5)