Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Survival Tree01:19

Survival Tree

Survival trees are a non-parametric method used in survival analysis to model the relationship between a set of covariates and the time until an event of interest occurs, often referred to as the "time-to-event" or "survival time." This method is particularly useful when dealing with censored data, where the event has not occurred for some individuals by the end of the study period, or when the exact time of the event is unknown.
 Building a Survival Tree
Constructing a survival tree begins...
Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can have a...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups01:20

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups

Survival analysis is a cornerstone of medical research, used to evaluate the time until an event of interest occurs, such as death, disease recurrence, or recovery. Unlike standard statistical methods, survival analysis is particularly adept at handling censored data—instances where the event has not occurred for some participants by the end of the study or remains unobserved. To address these unique challenges, specialized techniques like the Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and Cox...
Decision Making01:20

Decision Making

Decision-making is a fundamental cognitive process that involves evaluating alternatives and selecting among them. This process can range from simple choices, such as deciding what to wear, to complex decisions, like choosing a major in college or a career path. The complexity of the decision often dictates the approach we use, which can be broadly categorized into two types: automatic and controlled decision-making.
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
Evolutionary Relationships through Genome Comparisons02:54

Evolutionary Relationships through Genome Comparisons

Genome comparison is one of the excellent ways to interpret the evolutionary relationships between organisms. The basic principle of genome comparison is that if two species share a common feature, it is likely encoded by the DNA sequence conserved between both species. The advent of genome sequencing technologies in the late 20th century enabled scientists to understand the concept of conservation of domains between species and helped them to deduce evolutionary relationships across diverse...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Preoperative CT-Based Habitat Radiomics Classifiers Predict Recurrence in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences·2026
Same author

Utilizing Clinicopathological and Radiomic Features for Risk Stratification of Lung Cancer Recurrence.

Academic radiology·2025
Same author

Lessons from Collecting a Million Biometric Samples.

Image and vision computing·2024
Same author

Evaluating clinical and radiomic features for predicting lung cancer recurrence pre- and post-tumor resection.

Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering·2024
Same author

A novel deep learning-based method for automatic stereology of microglia cells from low magnification images.

Neurotoxicology and teratology·2024
Same author

Modeling information diffusion in social media: data-driven observations.

Frontiers in big data·2023

Related Experiment Videos

A comparison of decision tree ensemble creation techniques.

Robert E Banfield1, Lawrence O Hall, Kevin W Bowyer

  • 1IEEE.

IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
|November 17, 2006
PubMed
Summary

This study compares ensemble methods for decision tree classifiers. Boosting, random forests, and randomized trees significantly outperform bagging, highlighting the importance of ensemble size selection.

Related Experiment Videos

Area of Science:

  • Machine Learning
  • Computer Science
  • Data Mining

Background:

  • Ensemble methods, particularly bagging, are widely used for improving decision tree classifier accuracy.
  • Randomization-based approaches offer alternative strategies for constructing decision tree ensembles.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To experimentally compare the performance of bagging against seven other randomization-based ensemble methods for decision tree classifiers.
  • To investigate the impact of ensemble size and introduce a method for determining optimal ensemble size.

Main Methods:

  • Experimental evaluation of bagging and seven other ensemble algorithms on 57 diverse, publicly available datasets.
  • Statistical significance testing of cross-validation results to compare algorithm performance.
  • Introduction and validation of a novel algorithm for adaptive ensemble size selection using out-of-bag error estimates.

Main Results:

  • While direct cross-validation comparisons showed the best method was only significantly better than bagging on 8 out of 57 datasets, average rank analysis revealed significant improvements.
  • Boosting, random forests, and randomized trees demonstrated statistically significant superiority over bagging when considering average performance across all datasets.
  • The proposed algorithm for adaptive ensemble size selection, utilizing out-of-bag error, effectively determined sufficient ensemble sizes, leading to accurate results for bagging-based methods.

Conclusions:

  • Ensemble methods like boosting, random forests, and randomized trees offer statistically significant performance gains over basic bagging for decision tree classification.
  • The selection of an appropriate ensemble size is crucial for optimal performance, and an adaptive approach using out-of-bag error can effectively manage this.
  • The findings provide valuable insights for practitioners seeking to optimize decision tree ensemble performance through advanced ensemble techniques and adaptive size determination.