ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Improved boosting algorithms using confidence-rated predictions
Full text PdfPdf (1.59 MB)
Source Annual Workshop on Computational Learning Theory archive
Proceedings of the eleventh annual conference on Computational learning theory table of contents
Madison, Wisconsin, United States
Pages: 80 - 91  
Year of Publication: 1998
ISBN:1-58113-057-0
Authors
Robert E. Schapire  AT&T Labs, 180 Park Avenue, Florham Park, NJ
Yoram Singer  AT&T Labs, 180 Park Avenue, Florham Park, NJ
Sponsors
University of Wisconsin : University of Wisconsin
UC @ Santa Cruz : UC @ Santa Cruz
SIGACT: ACM Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory
SIGART: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 3,   Downloads (12 Months): 59,   Citation Count: 46
Additional Information:

references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues   peer to peer  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/279943.279960
What is a DOI?

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Peter L. Bartlett. The sample complexity of pattem classification with neural networks: the size of the weights is more important than the size of the network. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 1998 (to appeaD.
 
2
Eric Bauer and Ron Kohavi. An empirical comparison of voting classification algorithms: Bagging, boosting, and variants. Unpublished manuscript, 1997.
 
3
 
4
Avfim Blum. Empirical support for winnow and weightedmajority based algorithms: results on a calendar scheduling domain. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conj'krence on Machine Learning, pages 64-72, 1995.
 
5
Leo Breiman. Aming classifiers. Annals of Statistics, to appear.
 
6
Thomas G. Dietterich. An experimental comparison of three methods for constructing ensembles of decision trees: Bagging, boosting, and randomization, llnpublished manuscript, 1998.
 
7
Thomas G. Dietterich and Ghulum Bakiri. Solving multiclass learning problems via error-cmrecting output codes. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 2:263-286, January 1995.
 
8
Hams Dmckerand Cofinna Cortes. Boosting decision trees. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 8, pages 479-485, 1996.
 
9
Yoav Freund and Robert E. Schapire. F, xpefiments with a new boosting algorithm. In Machine Learning: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference, pages 148-156, 1996.
 
10
11
 
12
 
13
14
 
15
Richard Maclin and David Opitz. An empirical evaluation of bagging and boosting. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 546- 551, 1997.
 
16
 
17
C. J. Merz and P. M. Murphy. UCI repository of machine leaming Databases,1998. http://www.ics .uci.edu/,,mtleam/MLRe pository.html.
 
18
J. R. Quinlan. Bagging, boosting, and C4.5. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 725-730, 1996.
 
19
 
20
Robert E. Schapire, Yoav Freund, Peter Bartlett, and Wee Sun Lee. Boosting the margin: A new explanation for the effectiveness of voting methods. Annals of Statistics, to appear.
 
21
Robert E. Schapire and Yoram Singer. BoosTexter: A system for multiclass multi-label text categorization. Unpublished manuscript, 1998.
 
22

CITED BY  46
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Collaborative Colleagues:
Robert E. Schapire: colleagues
Yoram Singer: colleagues

Peer to Peer - Readers of this Article have also read: