Classifier Performance and Evaluation



Among all machine learning problems, classification is the most well studied, and has the most number of solution methodologies. This embarrassment of riches also leads to the natural problems of model selection and evaluation.


  1. [3]
    C. Aggarwal. Recommender systems: The textbook. Springer, 2016.Google Scholar
  2. [4]
    C. Aggarwal. Outlier analysis. Springer, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [9]
    C. Aggarwal and S. Sathe. Outlier ensembles: An introduction. Springer, 2017.Google Scholar
  4. [60]
    L. Breiman. Random forests. Journal Machine Learning archive, 45(1), pp. 5–32, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [61]
    L. Breiman. Bagging predictors. Machine Learning, 24(2), pp. 123–140, 1996.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. [65]
    P. Bühlmann and B. Yu. Analyzing bagging. Annals of Statistics, pp. 927–961, 2002.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [166]
    T. Fawcett. ROC Graphs: Notes and Practical Considerations for Researchers. Technical Report HPL-2003-4, Palo Alto, CA, HP Laboratories, 2003.Google Scholar
  8. [173]
    Y. Freund, and R. Schapire. A decision-theoretic generalization of online learning and application to boosting. Computational Learning Theory, pp. 23–37, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. [174]
    J. Friedman. Stochastic gradient boosting. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 38(4), pp. 367–378, 2002.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [175]
    J. Friedman, T. Hastie, and R. Tibshirani. Additive logistic regression: a statistical view of boosting (with discussion and a rejoinder by the authors). The Annals of Statistics, 28(2), pp. 337–407, 2000.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [206]
    T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, and J. Friedman. The elements of statistical learning. Springer, 2009.Google Scholar
  12. [209]
    T. Hastie and R. Tibshirani. Generalized additive models. CRC Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. [220]
    T. K. Ho. Random decision forests. Third International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition, 1995. Extended version appears as “The random subspace method for constructing decision forests” in IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 20(8), pp. 832–844, 1998.Google Scholar
  14. [221]
    T. K. Ho. Nearest neighbors in random subspaces. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1451, pp. 640–648, Proceedings of the Joint IAPR Workshops SSPR’98 and SPR’98, 1998.
  15. [264]
    R. Kohavi and D. Wolpert. Bias plus variance decomposition for zero-one loss functions. ICML Conference, 1996.Google Scholar
  16. [265]
    E. Kong and T. Dietterich. Error-correcting output coding corrects bias and variance. ICML Conference, pp. 313–321, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [267]
    M. Kuhn. Building predictive models in R Using the caret Package. Journal of Statistical Software, 28(5), pp. 1–26, 2008. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [321]
    C. Manning, P. Raghavan, and H. Schütze. Introduction to information retrieval. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008.Google Scholar
  19. [428]
    R. Samworth. Optimal weighted nearest neighbour classifiers. The Annals of Statistics, 40(5), pp. 2733–2763, 2012.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [441]
    G. Seni and J. Elder. Ensemble methods in data mining: Improving accuracy through combining predictions. Synthesis Lectures in Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, Morgan and Claypool, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [510]
    J. Xu and H. Li. Adarank: a boosting algorithm for information retrieval. ACM SIGIR Conference, 2007.Google Scholar
  22. [539]
    Z.-H. Zhou. Ensemble methods: Foundations and algorithms. CRC Press, 2012.Google Scholar
  23. [549]
  24. [550]
  25. [553]
  26. [555]
  27. [571]
  28. [572]
  29. [573]
  30. [574]
  31. [575]
  32. [576]
  33. [577]
  34. [578]
  35. [579]
  36. [580]

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IBM T. J. Watson Research CenterYorktown HeightsUSA

Personalised recommendations