Much of previous attention on decision trees focuses on the splitting criteria and optimization of tree sizes. The dilemma between overfitting and achieving maximum accuracy is seldom resolved. We propose a method to construct a decision tree based classifier that maintains highest accuracy on training data and improves on generalization accuracy as it grows in complexity. The classifier consists of multiple trees constructed systematically by pseudorandomly selecting subsets of components of the feature vector, that is, trees constructed in randomly chosen subspaces. The subspace method is compared to single-tree classifiers and other forest construction methods by experiments on publicly available datasets, where the method's superiority is demonstrated. We also discuss independence between trees in a forest and relate that to the combined classification accuracy. keywords: pattern recognition, decision tree, decision forest, stochastic discrimination, decision combination, classif...

This article describes a new system for induction of oblique decision trees. This system, OC1, combines deterministic hill-climbing with two forms of randomization to find a good oblique split (in the form of a hyperplane) at each node of a decision tree. Oblique decision tree methods are tuned especially for domains in which the attributes are numeric, although they can be adapted to symbolic or mixed symbolic/numeric attributes. We present extensive empirical studies, using both real and artificial data, that analyze OC1's ability to construct oblique trees that are smaller and more accurate than their axis-parallel counterparts. We also examine the benefits of randomization for the construction of oblique decision trees. 1. Introduction Current data collection technology provides a unique challenge and opportunity for automated machine learning techniques. The advent of major scientific projects such as the Human Genome Project, the Hubble Space Telescope, and the human brain mappi...

Decision trees have proved to be valuable tools for the description, classification and generalization of data. Work on constructing decision trees from data exists in multiple disciplines such as statistics, pattern recognition, decision theory, signal processing, machine learning and artificial neural networks. Researchers in these disciplines, sometimes working on quite different problems, identified similar issues and heuristics for decision tree construction. This paper surveys existing work on decision tree construction, attempting to identify the important issues involved, directions the work has taken and the current state of the art. Keywords: classification, tree-structured classifiers, data compaction 1. Introduction Advances in data collection methods, storage and processing technology are providing a unique challenge and opportunity for automated data exploration techniques. Enormous amounts of data are being collected daily from major scientific projects e.g., Human Genome...

This paper is a survey of inductive rule learning algorithms that use a separate-and-conquer strategy. This strategy can be traced back to the AQ learning system and still enjoys popularity as can be seen from its frequent use in inductive logic programming systems. We will put this wide variety of algorithms into a single framework and analyze them along three different dimensions, namely their search, language and overfitting avoidance biases.

Algorithms for learning cIassification trees have had successes in ar-tificial intelligence and statistics over many years. This paper outlines how a tree learning algorithm can be derived using Bayesian statis-tics. This iutroduces Bayesian techniques for splitting, smoothing, and tree averaging. The splitting rule is similar to QuinIan’s information gain, while smoothing and averaging replace pruning. Comparative ex-periments with reimplementations of a minimum encoding approach, Quinlan’s C4 (1987) and Breiman et aL’s CART (1984) show the full Bayesian algorithm produces more accurate predictions than versions

Multivariate decision trees overcome a representational limitation of univariate decision trees: univariate decision trees are restricted to splits of the instance space that are orthogonal to the feature's axis. This paper discusses the following issues for constructing multivariate decision trees: representing a multivariate test, including symbolic and numeric features, learning the coefficients of a multivariate test, selecting the features to include in a test, and pruning of multivariate decision trees. We present some new and review some well-known methods for forming multivariate decision trees. The methods are compared across a variety of learning tasks to assess each method's ability to find concise, accurate decision trees. The results demonstrate that some multivariate methods are more effective than others. In addition, the experiments confirm that allowing multivariate tests improves the accuracy of the resulting decision tree over univariate trees. Contents 1 Introduc...

Clustering is often used for discovering structure in data. Clustering systems differ in the objective function used to evaluate clustering quality and the control strategy used to search the space of clusterings. Ideally, the search strategy should consistently construct clusterings of high quality, but be computationally inexpensive as well. In general, we cannot have it both ways, but we can partition the search so that a system inexpensively constructs a `tentative' clustering for initial examination, followed by iterative optimization, which continues to search in background for improved clusterings. Given this motivation, we evaluate an inexpensive strategy for creating initial clusterings, coupled with several control strategies for iterative optimization, each of which repeatedly modifies an initial clustering in search of a better one. One of these methods appears novel as an iterative optimization strategy in clustering contexts. Once a clustering has been construct...

We analyze the performance of top-down algorithms for decision tree learning, such as those employed by the widely used C4.5 and CART software packages. Our main result is a proof that such algorithms are boosting algorithms. By this we mean that if the functions used to label the internal nodes of the decision tree can weakly approximate the unknown target function, then the top-down algorithms we study will amplify this weak advantage to build a tree achieving any desired level of accuracy. The bounds we obtain for this amplification show an interesting dependence on the splitting criterion function G used by the top-down algorithm. More precisely, if the functions used to label the internal nodes have error 1=2 \Gamma fl as approximations to the target function, then for the splitting criteria used by CART and C4.5, trees of size (1=ffl) O(1=fl 2 ffl 2 ) and (1=ffl) O(log(1=ffl)=fl 2 ) (respectively) suffice to drive the error below ffl. Thus, small constant advantage over...

The main contributions of this thesis are a Bayesian theory of learning classification rules, the unification and comparison of this theory with some previous theories of learning, and two extensive applications of the theory to the problems of learning class probability trees and bounding error when learning logical rules. The thesis is motivated by considering some current research issues in machine learning such as bias, overfitting and search, and considering the requirements placed on a learning system when it is used for knowledge acquisition. Basic Bayesian decision theory relevant to the problem of learning classification rules is reviewed, then a Bayesian framework for such learning is presented. The framework has three components: the hypothesis space, the learning protocol, and criteria for successful learning. Several learning protocols are analysed in detail: queries, logical, noisy, uncertain and positive-only examples. The analysis is done by interpreting a protocol as a...

Keywords Running Head multiple comparison procedure Multiple Comparisons in Induction Algorithms David Jensen and Paul R. Cohen Experimental Knowledge Systems Laboratory Department of Computer Science Box 34610 LGRC University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003-4610 413-545-3613 A single mechanism is responsible for three pathologies of induction algorithms: attribute selection errors, overfitting, and oversearching. In each pathology, induction algorithms compare multiple items based on scores from an evaluation function and select the item with the maximum score. We call this a ( ). We analyze the statistical properties of and show how failure to adjust for these properties leads to the pathologies. We also discuss approaches that can control pathological behavior, including Bonferroni adjustment, randomization testing, and cross-validation. Inductive learning, overfitting, oversearching, attribute selection, hypothesis testing, parameter estimation Multiple Com...