In the regression context, boosting and bagging are techniques to build a committee of regressors that may be superior to a single regressor. We use regression trees as fundamental building blocks in bagging committee machines and boosting committee machines. Performance is analyzed on three non-linear functions and the Boston housing database. In all cases, boosting is at least equivalent, and...

One approach in classification tasks is to use machine learning techniques to derive classifiers using learning instances. The cooperation of several base classifiers as a decision committee has succeeded to reduce classification error. The main current decision committee learning approaches boosting and bagging use resampling with the training set and they can be used with different machine le...

Classiier committee learning approaches have demonstrated great success in increasing the prediction accuracy of classiier learning , which is a key technique for datamining. It has been shown that Boosting and Bagging, as two representative methods of this type, can signiicantly decrease the error rate of decision tree learning. Boosting is generally more accurate than Bagging, but the former ...

Classiier committee learning approaches have demonstrated great success in increasing the prediction accuracy of classiier learning , which is a key technique for datamining. These approaches generate several classiiers to form a committee by repeated application of a single base learning algorithm. The committee members vote to decide the nal classiication. It has been shown that Boosting and ...

Bagging forms a committee of classijiers by bootstrap aggregation of training sets from a pool of training data. A simple alternative to bagging is to partition the data into disjoint subsets. Experiments on various datasets show that, given the same size partitions and bags, disjoint partitions result in betterperformance than bootstrap aggregates (bags). Many applications (e.g., protein struc...

In previous researches it can been seen that Bagging, Boosting and Cross-Validation Committee can provide good performance separately. In this paper, Boosting methods are mixed with Bagging and Cross-Validation Committee in order to generate accurate ensembles and take benefit from all these alternatives. In this way, the networks are trained according to the boosting methods but the specific t...

Classi er committee learning methods generate multiple classi ers to form a committee by repeated application of a single base learning algorithm. The committee members vote to decide the nal classication. Two such methods, Bagging and Boosting, have shown great success with decision tree learning. They create di erent classi ers by modifying the distribution of the training set. This paper stu...

Decision committee learning has demonstrated spectacular success in reducing classification error from learned classifiers. These techniques develop a classifier in the form of a committee of subsidiary classifiers. The combination of outputs is usually performed by majority vote. Voting, however, has a shortcoming. It is unable to take into account local expertise. When a new instance is diffi...

10 Bagging forms a committee of classifiers by bootstrap aggregation of training sets from a pool of training data. A 11 simple alternative to bagging is to partition the data into disjoint subsets. Experiments with decision tree and neural 12 network classifiers on various datasets show that, given the same size partitions and bags, disjoint partitions result in 13 performance equivalent to, o...

Boosting and Bagging, as two representative approaches to learning classiier committees, have demonstrated great success, especially for decision tree learning. They repeatedly build diierent classiiers using a base learning algorithm by changing the distribution of the training set. Sasc, as a diierent type of committee learning method, can also signiicantly reduce the error rate of decision t...