An ensemble consists of a set of individually trained classifiers (such as neural networks or decision trees) whose predictions are combined when classifying novel instances. Previous research has shown that an ensemble is often more accurate than any of the single classifiers in the ensemble. Bagging (Breiman, 1996c) and Boosting (Freund and Shapire, 1996; Shapire, 1990) are two relatively new but popular methods for producing ensembles. In this paper we evaluate these methods on 23 data sets using both neural networks and decision trees as our classification algorithm. Our results clearly indicate a number of conclusions. First, while Bagging is almost always more accurate than a single classifier, it is sometimes much less accurate than Boosting. On the other hand, Boosting can create ensembles that are less accurate than a single classifier -- especially when using neural networks. Analysis indicates that the performance of the Boosting methods is dependent on the characteristics of the data set being examined. In fact, further results show that Boosting ensembles may overfit noisy data sets, thus decreasing its performance. Finally, consistent with previous studies, our work suggests that most of the gain in an ensemble's performance comes in the first few classifiers combined; however, relatively large gains can be seen up to 25 classifiers when Boosting decision trees
This study evaluates six different approaches to classifying and mapping fire severity using multi-temporal Landsat Thematic Mapper data. The six approaches tested include: two based on temporal image differencing and ratioing between pre-fire and post-fire images, two based on principal component analysis of pre-and post-fire imagery, and two based on artificial neural networks, one using just postfire imagery and the other both pre-and post-fire imagery. Our results demonstrated the potential value for any of these methods to provide quantitative fire severity maps, but one of the image differencing methods (ND4/7) provided a flexible, robust, and analytically simple approach that could be applied anywhere in the Continental U.S.Based on the results of this test, the ND4/7 was implemented operationally to classify and map fire severity over
Hierarchical quantitative structure-activity relationships (H-QSAR) have been developed as a new approach in constructing models for estimating physicochemical, biomedicinal, and toxicological properties of interest. This approach uses increasingly more complex molecular descriptors in a graduated approach to model building. In this study, statistical and neural network methods have been applied to the development of H-QSAR models for estimating the acute aquatic toxicity (LC50) of 69 benzene derivatives to Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow). Topostructural, topochemical, geometrical, and quantum chemical indices were used as the four levels of the hierarchical method. It is clear from both the statistical and neural network models that topostructural indices alone cannot adequately model this set of congeneric chemicals. Not surprisingly, topochemical indices greatly increase the predictive power of both statistical and neural network models. Quantum chemical indices also add significantly to the modeling of this set of acute aquatic toxicity data.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with đź’™ for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.