Fundamental Flowers: Evolutionary Discovery of Coresets for Classification

  • Pietro Barbiero
  • Alberto TondaEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11454)


In an optimization problem, a coreset can be defined as a subset of the input points, such that a good approximation to the optimization problem can be obtained by solving it directly on the coreset, instead of using the whole original input. In machine learning, coresets are exploited for applications ranging from speeding up training time, to helping humans understand the fundamental properties of a class, by considering only a few meaningful samples. The problem of discovering coresets, starting from a dataset and an application, can be defined as identifying the minimal amount of samples that do not significantly lower performance with respect to the performance on the whole dataset. Specialized literature offers several approaches to finding coresets, but such algorithms often disregard the application, or explicitly ask the user for the desired number of points. Starting from the consideration that finding coresets is an intuitively multi-objective problem, as minimizing the number of points goes against maintaining the original performance, in this paper we propose a multi-objective evolutionary approach to identifying coresets for classification. The proposed approach is tested on classical machine learning classification benchmarks, using 6 state-of-the-art classifiers, comparing against 7 algorithms for coreset discovery. Results show that not only the proposed approach is able to find coresets representing different compromises between compactness and performance, but that different coresets are identified for different classifiers, reinforcing the assumption that coresets might be closely linked to the specific application.


Machine learning Coresets Evolutionary computation Explain AI Multi-objective optimization 


  1. 1.
    Bachem, O., Lucic, M., Krause, A.: Practical coreset constructions for machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.06476 (2017)
  2. 2.
    Huggins, J.H., Campbell, T., Broderick, T.: Coresets for scalable bayesian logistic regression. In: 30th Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) (2016).
  3. 3.
    Campbell, T., Broderick, T.: Bayesian coreset construction via greedy iterative geodesic ascent. In: International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) (2018).
  4. 4.
    Clarkson, K.L.: Coresets, sparse greedy approximation, and the Frank-Wolfe algorithm. ACM Trans. Algorithms 6(4), 63 (2010).
  5. 5.
    Efroymson, M.A.: Multiple regression analysis. In: Ralston, A., Wilf, H.S. (eds.) Mathematical Methods for Digital Computers. Wiley, New York (1960)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Efron, B., Hastie, T., Johnstone, I., Tibshirani, R.: Least angle regression. Ann. Stat. 32(2), 407–451 (2004).
  7. 7.
    Boutsidis, C., Drineas, P., Magdon-Ismail, M.: Near-optimal coresets for least-squares regression. Technical report (2013).
  8. 8.
    Mallat, S., Zhang, Z.: Matching pursuits with time-frequency dictionaries. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 42(12), 3397–3415 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pati, Y., Rezaiifar, R., Krishnaprasad, P.: Orthogonal matching pursuit: recursive function approximation with applications to wavelet decomposition. In: Proceedings of 27th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, pp. 40–44 (1993).
  10. 10.
    Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., Meyarivan, T.: A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-ii. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 6(2), 182–197 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Samuel, A.L.: Some studies in machine learning using the game of checkers. IBM J. Res. Dev. 3(3), 210–229 (1959)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Stone, C.J., Olshen, R.A.: Classification and Regression Trees. CRC Press, Boca Raton (1984)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cox, D.R.: The regression analysis of binary sequences. J. Roy. Stat. Soc.: Ser. B (Methodol.) 20(2), 215–242 (1958)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., Courville, A.: Deep Learning. MIT press, Massachusetts (2016)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tsang, I.W., Kwok, J.T., Cheung, P.M.: Core vector machines: fast SVM training on very large data sets. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 6, 363–392 (2005)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Campbell, T., Broderick, T.: Automated Scalable Bayesian Inference via Hilbert Coresets (2017).
  17. 17.
    Breiman, L.: Pasting small votes for classification in large databases and on-line. Mach. Learn. 36(1–2), 85–103 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Friedman, J.H.: Greedy function approximation: a gradient boosting machine. Ann. Stat. 29(5), 1189–1232 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Breiman, L.: Random forests. Mach. Learn. 45(1), 5–32 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tikhonov, A.N.: On the stability of inverse problems. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR. 39, 195–198 (1943)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hearst, M.A., Dumais, S.T., Osman, E., Platt, J., Scholkopf, B.: Support vector machines. IEEE Intell. Syst. Appl. 13(4), 18–28 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pedregosa, F., et al.: Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2825–2830 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Garrett, A.: inspyred (version 1.0.1) inspired intelligence (2012).
  24. 24.
    Fisher, R.A.: The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems. Ann. Eugenics 7(2), 179–188 (1936)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Politecnico di TorinoTorinoItaly
  2. 2.Université Paris-SaclaySaclayFrance
  3. 3.UMR 782 INRAThiverval-GrignonFrance

Personalised recommendations