Supervised Classification: Quite a Brief Overview

The original problem of supervised classification considers the task of automatically assigning objects to their respective classes on the basis of numerical measurements derived from these objects. Classifiers are the tools that implement the actual functional mapping from these measurements---also called features or inputs---to the so-called class label---or output. The fields of pattern recognition and machine learning study ways of constructing such classifiers. The main idea behind supervised methods is that of learning from examples: given a number of example input-output relations, to what extent can the general mapping be learned that takes any new and unseen feature vector to its correct class? This chapter provides a basic introduction to the underlying ideas of how to come to a supervised classification problem. In addition, it provides an overview of some specific classification techniques, delves into the issues of object representation and classifier evaluation, and (very) briefly covers some variations on the basic supervised classification task that may also be of interest to the practitioner

Error Bounds for Piecewise Smooth and Switching Regression

The paper deals with regression problems, in which the nonsmooth target is assumed to switch between different operating modes. Specifically, piecewise smooth (PWS) regression considers target functions switching deterministically via a partition of the input space, while switching regression considers arbitrary switching laws. The paper derives generalization error bounds in these two settings by following the approach based on Rademacher complexities. For PWS regression, our derivation involves a chaining argument and a decomposition of the covering numbers of PWS classes in terms of the ones of their component functions and the capacity of the classifier partitioning the input space. This yields error bounds with a radical dependency on the number of modes. For switching regression, the decomposition can be performed directly at the level of the Rademacher complexities, which yields bounds with a linear dependency on the number of modes. By using once more chaining and a decomposition at the level of covering numbers, we show how to recover a radical dependency. Examples of applications are given in particular for PWS and swichting regression with linear and kernel-based component functions.Comment: This work has been submitted to the IEEE for possible publication. Copyright may be transferred without notice,after which this version may no longer be accessibl

Non-uniform Feature Sampling for Decision Tree Ensembles

We study the effectiveness of non-uniform randomized feature selection in decision tree classification. We experimentally evaluate two feature selection methodologies, based on information extracted from the provided dataset: $(i)$ \emph{leverage scores-based} and $(ii)$ \emph{norm-based} feature selection. Experimental evaluation of the proposed feature selection techniques indicate that such approaches might be more effective compared to naive uniform feature selection and moreover having comparable performance to the random forest algorithm [3]Comment: 7 pages, 7 figures, 1 tabl

Learning Kernel-Based Halfspaces with the Zero-One Loss

We describe and analyze a new algorithm for agnostically learning kernel-based halfspaces with respect to the \emph{zero-one} loss function. Unlike most previous formulations which rely on surrogate convex loss functions (e.g. hinge-loss in SVM and log-loss in logistic regression), we provide finite time/sample guarantees with respect to the more natural zero-one loss function. The proposed algorithm can learn kernel-based halfspaces in worst-case time \poly(\exp(L\log(L/\epsilon))), for \emph{any} distribution, where $L$ is a Lipschitz constant (which can be thought of as the reciprocal of the margin), and the learned classifier is worse than the optimal halfspace by at most $\epsilon$. We also prove a hardness result, showing that under a certain cryptographic assumption, no algorithm can learn kernel-based halfspaces in time polynomial in $L$.Comment: This is a full version of the paper appearing in the 23rd International Conference on Learning Theory (COLT 2010). Compared to the previous arXiv version, this version contains some small corrections in the proof of Lemma 3 and in appendix