Advertisement

FaSS: Ensembles for Stable Learners

  • Kai Ming Ting
  • Jonathan R. Wells
  • Swee Chuan Tan
  • Shyh Wei Teng
  • Geoffrey I. Webb
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5519)

Abstract

This paper introduces a new ensemble approach, Feature-Space Subdivision (FaSS), which builds local models instead of global models. FaSS is a generic ensemble approach that can use either stable or unstable models as its base models. In contrast, existing ensemble approaches which employ randomisation can only use unstable models. Our analysis shows that the new approach reduces the execution time to generate a model in an ensemble with an increased level of localisation in FaSS. Our empirical evaluation shows that FaSS performs significantly better than boosting in terms of predictive accuracy, when a stable learner SVM is used as the base learner. The speed up achieved by FaSS makes SVM ensembles a reality that would otherwise infeasible for large data sets, and FaSS SVM performs better than Boosting J48 and Random Forests when SVM is the preferred base learner.

Keywords

Local models stable learners 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Asuncion, A., Newman, D.J.: UCI repository of machine learning databases. University of California, Irvine (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Breiman, L.: Bagging Predictors. Machine Learning 24, 123–140 (1996)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Breiman, L.: Random forests. Machine Learning 45, 5–32 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Frank, E., Hall, M., Pfahringer, B.: Locally Weighted Naive Bayes. In: Proc. of the 19th Conf. on Uncertainty in AI, pp. 249–256 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ho, T.K.: The Random Subspace Method for Constructing Decision Forests. IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 20(8), 832–844 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kohavi, R.: Scaling Up the Accuracy of Naive-Bayes Classifiers: a Decision-Tree Hybrid. In: Proc. of the 2nd KDD, pp. 202–207 (1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kohavi, R., Li, C.H.: Oblivious Decision Trees, Graphs, and Top-Down Pruning. In: Proc. of 1995 Intl. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1071–1077 (1995)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Opitz, D.: Feature selection for ensembles. In: Proc. of the 16th AAAI, pp. 379–384 (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Oza, N.C., Tumer, K.: Input Decimation Ensembles: Decorrelation through Dimensionality Reduction. In: Kittler, J., Roli, F. (eds.) MCS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2096, pp. 238–247. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pavlov, D., Mao, J., Dom, B.: Scaling-up support vector machines using the boosting algorithm. In: Proc. of 2000 Intl. Conf. on Pattern Recognition, pp. 219–222 (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schapire, R.E., Singer, S.: Improved boosting algorithms using confidence-rated predictions. Machine Learning 37, 297–336 (1999)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tao, D., Tang, X., Li, X., Wu, X.: Asymmetric bagging and random subspace for support vector machines-based relevance feedback in image retrieval. IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 28(7), 1088–1099 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Witten, I.H., Frank, E.: Data Mining: Practical machine learning tools and techniques, 2nd edn. (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zheng, Z., Webb, G.I.: Lazy Learning of Bayesian Rules. Machine Learning 41(1), 53–84 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kai Ming Ting
    • 1
  • Jonathan R. Wells
    • 1
  • Swee Chuan Tan
    • 1
  • Shyh Wei Teng
    • 1
  • Geoffrey I. Webb
    • 2
  1. 1.Gippsland School of Information TechnologyAustralia
  2. 2.Clayton School of Information TechnologyMonash UniversityAustralia

Personalised recommendations