Is a Greedy Covering Strategy an Extreme Boosting?

Authors:
Roberto Esposito;Lorenza Saitta
Affiliations:
-;-
Venue:
ISMIS '02 Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Foundations of Intelligent Systems
Year:
2002

Citing 6
Cited 0

Algorithmics: theory & practice

Algorithmics: theory & practice
The Strength of Weak Learnability

Machine Learning
Bagging predictors

Machine Learning
Game theory, on-line prediction and boosting

COLT '96 Proceedings of the ninth annual conference on Computational learning theory
An Empirical Comparison of Voting Classification Algorithms: Bagging, Boosting, and Variants

Machine Learning
Bagging, boosting, and C4.S

AAAI'96 Proceedings of the thirteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

A new view of majority voting as a Monte Carlo stochastic algorithm is presented in this paper. Relation between the two approaches allows Adaboost's example weighting strategy to be compared with the greedy covering strategy used for a long time in Machine Learning. The greedy covering strategy does not clearly show overfitting, it runs in at least one order of magnitude less time, it reaches zero error on the training set in few trials, and the error on the test set is most of the time comparable to that exhibited by AdaBoost.