Comparison of Tree-Based Methods for Multi-target Regression on Data Streams

  • Aljaž Osojnik
  • Panče Panov
  • Sašo Džeroski
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9607)


Single-target regression is a classical data mining task that is popular both in the batch and in the streaming setting. Multi-target regression is an extension of the single-target regression task, in which multiple continuous targets have to be predicted together. Recent studies in the batch setting have shown that global approaches, predicting all of the targets at once, tend to outperform local approaches, predicting each target separately. In this paper, we explore how different local and global tree-based approaches for multi-target regression compare in the streaming setting. Specifically, we apply a local method based on the FIMT-DD algorithm and propose a novel global method, named iSOUP-Tree-MTR. Furthermore, we present an experimental evaluation that is mainly oriented towards exploring the differences between the local and the global approach.


Data Stream Predictive Performance Target Variable Global Approach Memory Consumption 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors are supported by The Slovenian Research Agency (Grant P2-0103 and a young researcher grant) and the European Commission (Grants ICT-2013-612944 MAESTRA and ICT-2013-604102 HBP).


  1. 1.
    Appice, A., Džeroski, S.: Stepwise induction of multi-target model trees. In: 18th European Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 502–509 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bifet, A., Gavaldà, R.: Adaptive learning from evolving data streams. In: 8th International Symposium on Advances in Intelligent Data Analysis, pp. 249–260 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bifet, A., Holmes, G., Kirkby, R., Pfahringer, B.: MOA: Massive online analysis. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 11, 1601–1604 (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Domingos, P., Hulten, G.: Mining high-speed data streams. In: 6th ACM SIGKDD, pp. 71–80. ACM, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Duarte, J., Gama, J.: Ensembles of adaptive model rules from high-speed data streams. In: 3rd International Workshop on Big Data, Streams and Heterogeneous Source Mining, pp. 198–213 (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fanaee-T, H., Gama, J.: Event labeling combining ensemble detectors and background knowledge. Prog. Artif. Intell. 2, 1–15 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gama, J.: Knowledge Discovery from Data Streams. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2010)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ikonomovska, E., Gama, J.: Learning model trees from data streams. In: Boulicaut, J.-F., Berthold, M.R., Horváth, T. (eds.) DS 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5255, pp. 52–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ikonomovska, E., Gama, J., Džeroski, S.: Online tree-based ensembles and option trees for regression on evolving data streams. Neurocomputing 150, 458–470 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ikonomovska, E., Gama, J., Džeroski, S.: Incremental multi-target model trees for data streams. In: 2011 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 988–993. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ikonomovska, E., Gama, J., Džeroski, S.: Learning model trees from evolving data streams. Data Min. Knowl. Disc. 23(1), 128–168 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Silla Jr., C.N., Freitas, A.A.: A survey of hierarchical classification across different application domains. Data Min. Knowl. Disc. 22(1–2), 31–72 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kocev, D., Vens, C., Struyf, J., Džeroski, S.: Tree ensembles for predicting structured outputs. Pattern Recognit. 46(3), 817–833 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Osojnik, A., Panov, P., Džeroski, S.: Multi-label classification via multi-target regression on data streams. In: Japkowicz, N., Matwin, S. (eds.) DS 9356. LNCS, vol. 9356, pp. 170–185. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-24282-8_15 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Oza, N.C., Russel, S.J.: Experimental comparisons of online and batch versions of bagging and boosting. In: 7th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 359–364. ACM, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rutkowski, L., Pietruczuk, L., Duda, P., Jaworski, M.: Decision trees for mining data streams based on the McDiarmid’s bound. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 25(6), 1272–1279 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shaker, A., Hüllermeier, E.: IBLStreams: a system for instance-based classification and regression on data streams. Evol. Syst. 3(4), 235–249 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stojanova, D., Panov, P., Gjorgjioski, V., Kobler, A., Džeroski, S.: Estimating vegetation height and canopy cover from remotely sensed data with machine learning. Ecol. Inform. 5(4), 256–266 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stojanova, D.: Estimating Forest Properties from Remotely Sensed Data by using Machine Learning. Master’s thesis, Jožef Stefan International Postgraduate School, Ljubljana, Slovenia (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Struyf, J., Dzeroski, S.: Constraint based induction of multi-objective regression trees. In: 4th International Workshop on Knowledge Discovery in Inductive Databases, pp. 222–233 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Xioufis, E.S., Groves, W., Tsoumakas, G., Vlahavas, I.P.: Multi-label classification methods for multi-target regression. CoRR abs/1211.6581 (2012).

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aljaž Osojnik
    • 1
    • 2
  • Panče Panov
    • 1
  • Sašo Džeroski
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Jožef Stefan InstituteLjubljanaSlovenia
  2. 2.Jožef Stefan International Postgraduate SchoolLjubljanaSlovenia
  3. 3.Centre of Excellence for Integrated Approaches in Chemistry and Biology of ProteinsLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations