Measures of diversity in classifier ensembles and their relationship with the ensemble accuracy

被引:1743
作者
Kuncheva, LI [1 ]
Whitaker, CJ [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wales, Sch Informat, Bangor LL57 1UT, Gwynedd, Wales
关键词
pattern recognition; multiple classifiers ensemble/committee of learners; dependency and diversity; majority vote;
D O I
10.1023/A:1022859003006
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Diversity among the members of a team of classifiers is deemed to be a key issue in classifier combination. However, measuring diversity is not straightforward because there is no generally accepted formal definition. We have found and studied ten statistics which can measure diversity among binary classifier outputs (correct or incorrect vote for the class label): four averaged pairwise measures (the Q statistic, the correlation, the disagreement and the double fault) and six non-pairwise measures (the entropy of the votes, the difficulty index, the Kohavi-Wolpert variance, the interrater agreement, the generalized diversity, and the coincident failure diversity). Four experiments have been designed to examine the relationship between the accuracy of the team and the measures of diversity, and among the measures themselves. Although there are proven connections between diversity and accuracy in some special cases, our results raise some doubts about the usefulness of diversity measures in building classifier ensembles in real-life pattern recognition problems.
引用
收藏
页码:181 / 207
页数:27
相关论文
共 39 条
  • [1] Afifi A.A., 1979, Statistical Analysis: A Computer-Oriented Approach
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1996, P 13 AM ASS ART INT
  • [3] An empirical comparison of voting classification algorithms: Bagging, boosting, and variants
    Bauer, E
    Kohavi, R
    [J]. MACHINE LEARNING, 1999, 36 (1-2) : 105 - 139
  • [4] Bagging predictors
    Breiman, L
    [J]. MACHINE LEARNING, 1996, 24 (02) : 123 - 140
  • [5] BREIMAN L, 1999, COMBINING ARTIFICIAL, P31
  • [6] Carney J., 2000, TCDCS200002 DEP COMP
  • [7] An experimental comparison of three methods for constructing ensembles of decision trees: Bagging, boosting, and randomization
    Dietterich, TG
    [J]. MACHINE LEARNING, 2000, 40 (02) : 139 - 157
  • [8] Ensemble methods in machine learning
    Dietterich, TG
    [J]. MULTIPLE CLASSIFIER SYSTEMS, 2000, 1857 : 1 - 15
  • [9] BOOSTING AND OTHER ENSEMBLE METHODS
    DRUCKER, H
    CORTES, C
    JACKEL, LD
    LECUN, Y
    VAPNIK, V
    [J]. NEURAL COMPUTATION, 1994, 6 (06) : 1289 - 1301
  • [10] DUIN RPW, 1997, PRTOOLS VERSION 2 MA