Advertisement

Reduction Stumps for Multi-class Classification

  • Felix Mohr
  • Marcel WeverEmail author
  • Eyke Hüllermeier
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11191)

Abstract

Multi-class classification problems are often solved via reduction, i.e., by breaking the original problem into a set of presumably simpler subproblems (and aggregating the solutions of these problems later on). Typical examples of this approach include decomposition schemes such as one-vs-rest, all-pairs, and nested dichotomies. While all these techniques produce reductions to purely binary subproblems, which is reasonable when only binary classifiers ought to be used, we argue that reductions to other multi-class problems can be interesting, too. In this paper, we examine a new type of (meta-)classifier called reduction stump. A reduction stump creates a binary split among the given classes, thereby creating two subproblems, each of which is solved by a multi-class classifier in turn. On top, the two groups of classes are separated by a binary (or multi-class) classifier. In addition to simple reduction stumps, we consider ensembles of such models. Empirically, we show that this kind of reduction, in spite of its simplicity, can often lead to significant performance gains.

Keywords

Multi-class classification Reduction Ensembles Automated machine learning 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) within the Collaborative Research Center “On-The-Fly Computing” (SFB 901).

References

  1. 1.
    Dheeru, D., Karra Taniskidou, E.: UCI machine learning repository (2017). http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml
  2. 2.
    Dong, Lin, Frank, Eibe, Kramer, Stefan: Ensembles of balanced nested dichotomies for multi-class problems. In: Jorge, Alípio Mário, Torgo, Luís, Brazdil, Pavel, Camacho, Rui, Gama, João (eds.) PKDD 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3721, pp. 84–95. Springer, Heidelberg (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1007/11564126_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Duarte-Villaseñor, Miriam Mónica, Carrasco-Ochoa, Jesús Ariel, Martínez-Trinidad, José Francisco, Flores-Garrido, Marisol: Nested dichotomies based on clustering. In: Alvarez, Luis, Mejail, Marta, Gomez, Luis, Jacobo, Julio (eds.) CIARP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7441, pp. 162–169. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33275-3_20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Feurer, M., Klein, A., Eggensperger, K., Springenberg, J.T., Blum, M., Hutter, F.: Efficient and robust automated machine learning. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 28: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2015, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 7–12 December 2015, pp. 2962–2970 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frank, E., Kramer, S.: Ensembles of nested dichotomies for multi-class problems. In: Proceedings ICML, 21st International Conference on Machine Learning. Banff, Alberta, Canada (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fürnkranz, J.: Round robin classification. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2, 721–747 (2002). http://www.jmlr.org/papers/v2/fuernkranz02a.html
  7. 7.
    Kajdanowicz, T., Kazienko, P.: Multi-label classification using error correcting output codes. Appl. Math. Comput. Sci. 22(4), 829–840 (2012). http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/amcs.2012.22.issue-4/v10006-012-0061-2/v10006-012-0061-2.xmlCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leathart, Tim, Pfahringer, Bernhard, Frank, Eibe: Building Ensembles of adaptive nested dichotomies with random-pair selection. In: Frasconi, Paolo, Landwehr, Niels, Manco, Giuseppe, Vreeken, Jilles (eds.) ECML PKDD 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9852, pp. 179–194. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46227-1_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Melnikov, V., Hüllermeier, E.: On the effectiveness of heuristics for learning nested dichotomies: an empirical analysis. Mach. Learn. 107(8), 1537–1560 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mohr, F., Wever, M., Hüllermeier, E.: Ml-Plan: automated machine learning via hierarchical planning. Mach. Learn. 107(8), 1495–1515 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Olson, R.S., Moore, J.H.: TPOT: A tree-based pipeline optimization tool for automating machine learning. In: Proceedings of the 2016 Workshop on Automatic Machine Learning, AutoML 2016, Co-located with 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2016), New York City, NY, USA, 24 June 2016, pp. 66–74 (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thornton, C., Hutter, F., Hoos, H.H., Leyton-Brown, K.: Auto-WEKA: combined selection and hyperparameter optimization of classification algorithms. In: The 19th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, KDD 2013, Chicago, IL, USA, 11–14 August 2013, pp. 847–855 (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wever, M., Mohr, F., Hüllermeier, E.: Ensembles of evolved nested dichotomies. In: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference, GECCO 2018, Kyoto, Germany, 15–19 July 2018 (2018)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Heinz Nixdorf Institute, Department of Computer SciencePaderborn UniversityPaderbornGermany

Personalised recommendations