Visual Integration of Data and Model Space in Ensemble Learning

Ensembles of classifier models typically deliver superior performance and can outperform single classifier models given a dataset and classification task at hand. However, the gain in performance comes together with the lack in comprehensibility, posing a challenge to understand how each model affects the classification outputs and where the errors come from. We propose a tight visual integration of the data and the model space for exploring and combining classifier models. We introduce a workflow that builds upon the visual integration and enables the effective exploration of classification outputs and models. We then present a use case in which we start with an ensemble automatically selected by a standard ensemble selection algorithm, and show how we can manipulate models and alternative combinations.Comment: 8 pages, 7 picture

Dissimilarity-based Ensembles for Multiple Instance Learning

In multiple instance learning, objects are sets (bags) of feature vectors (instances) rather than individual feature vectors. In this paper we address the problem of how these bags can best be represented. Two standard approaches are to use (dis)similarities between bags and prototype bags, or between bags and prototype instances. The first approach results in a relatively low-dimensional representation determined by the number of training bags, while the second approach results in a relatively high-dimensional representation, determined by the total number of instances in the training set. In this paper a third, intermediate approach is proposed, which links the two approaches and combines their strengths. Our classifier is inspired by a random subspace ensemble, and considers subspaces of the dissimilarity space, defined by subsets of instances, as prototypes. We provide guidelines for using such an ensemble, and show state-of-the-art performances on a range of multiple instance learning problems.Comment: Submitted to IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, Special Issue on Learning in Non-(geo)metric Space

Popular Ensemble Methods: An Empirical Study

An ensemble consists of a set of individually trained classifiers (such as neural networks or decision trees) whose predictions are combined when classifying novel instances. Previous research has shown that an ensemble is often more accurate than any of the single classifiers in the ensemble. Bagging (Breiman, 1996c) and Boosting (Freund and Shapire, 1996; Shapire, 1990) are two relatively new but popular methods for producing ensembles. In this paper we evaluate these methods on 23 data sets using both neural networks and decision trees as our classification algorithm. Our results clearly indicate a number of conclusions. First, while Bagging is almost always more accurate than a single classifier, it is sometimes much less accurate than Boosting. On the other hand, Boosting can create ensembles that are less accurate than a single classifier -- especially when using neural networks. Analysis indicates that the performance of the Boosting methods is dependent on the characteristics of the data set being examined. In fact, further results show that Boosting ensembles may overfit noisy data sets, thus decreasing its performance. Finally, consistent with previous studies, our work suggests that most of the gain in an ensemble's performance comes in the first few classifiers combined; however, relatively large gains can be seen up to 25 classifiers when Boosting decision trees

Classification of Human Ventricular Arrhythmia in High Dimensional Representation Spaces

We studied classification of human ECGs labelled as normal sinus rhythm, ventricular fibrillation and ventricular tachycardia by means of support vector machines in different representation spaces, using different observation lengths. ECG waveform segments of duration 0.5-4 s, their Fourier magnitude spectra, and lower dimensional projections of Fourier magnitude spectra were used for classification. All considered representations were of much higher dimension than in published studies. Classification accuracy improved with segment duration up to 2 s, with 4 s providing little improvement. We found that it is possible to discriminate between ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation by the present approach with much shorter runs of ECG (2 s, minimum 86% sensitivity per class) than previously imagined. Ensembles of classifiers acting on 1 s segments taken over 5 s observation windows gave best results, with sensitivities of detection for all classes exceeding 93%.Comment: 9 pages, 2 tables, 5 figure