Abstract
This study investigates the effectiveness of bagging with respect to different learning algorithms on Imbalanced data-sets. The purpose of this research is to investigate the performance of bagging based on two unique approaches: (1) classify base learners with respect to 12 different learning algorithms in general terms, and (2) evaluate the performance of bagging predictors on data with imbalanced class distributions. The former approach develops a method to categorize base learners by using two-dimensional robustness and stability decomposition on 48 benchmark data-sets; while the latter approach investigates the performance of bagging predictors by using evaluation metrics, True Positive Rate (TPR), Geometric mean (G-mean) for the accuracy on the majority and minority classes, and the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve on 12 imbalanced data-sets. Our studies assert that both stability and robustness are important factors for building high performance bagging predictors on data with imbalanced class distributions. The experimental results demonstrated that PART and Multi-layer Proceptron (MLP) are the learning algorithms with the best bagging performance on 12 imbalanced data-sets. Moreover, only four out of 12 bagging predictors are statistically superior to single learners based on both G-mean and TPR evaluation metrics over 12 imbalanced data-sets.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Breiman, L.: Bagging predictors. Machine Learning 24, 123–140 (1996)
Chan, P., Stolfo, S.: Toward scalable learning with non-uniform class and cost distributions: A case study in credit card fraud detection. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 164–168 (1998)
Kubat, M., Holte, R.C., Matwin, S.: Machine learning for the detection of oil spills in satellite radar images. Machine Learning 30, 195–215 (1998)
Weiss, G.M., Provost, F.: Learning when training data are costly: The effect of class distribution on tree induction. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 19, 315–354 (2003)
Liang, G., Zhu, X., Zhang, C.: An Empirical Study of Bagging Predictors for Imbalanced Data with Different Levels of Class Distribution. In: Wang, D., Reynolds, M. (eds.) AI 2011. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7106, pp. 213–222. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Liang, G., Zhu, X., Zhang, C.: An empirical study of bagging predictors for different learning algorithms. In: 25th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2011, pp. 1802–1803. AAAI Press, San Francisco (2011)
Quinlan, J.: Bagging, boosting, and C4. 5. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 725–730 (1996)
Opitz, D., Maclin, R.: Popular ensemble methods: an empirical study. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 11, 169–198 (1999)
Dietterich, T.: An experimental comparison of three methods for constructing ensembles of decision trees: Bagging, boosting, and randomization. Machine Learning 40, 139–157 (2000)
Bauer, E., Kohavi, R.: An empirical comparison of voting classification algorithms: Bagging, boosting, and variants. Machine Learning 36, 105–139 (1999)
Chawla, N.V.: Data mining for imbalanced datasets: An overview. In: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery Handbook, pp. 875–886 (2010)
Provost, F., Fawcett, T.: Analysis and visualization of classifier performance with nonuniform class and cost distributions. In: Proceedings of AAAI 1997 Workshop on AI Approaches to Fraud Detection & Risk Management, pp. 57–63 (1997)
Provost, F., Fawcett, T., Kohavi, R.: The case against accuracy estimation for comparing induction algorithms. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 445–453. Morgan Kaufmann (1998)
Ling, C.X., Huang, J., Zhang, H.: AUC: A Better Measure than Accuracy in Comparing Learning Algorithms. In: Xiang, Y., Chaib-draa, B. (eds.) Canadian AI 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2671, pp. 329–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Demšar, J.: Statistical comparisons of classifiers over multiple data sets. The Journal of Machine Learning Research 7, 1–30 (2006)
Maloof, M.: Learning when data sets are imbalanced and when costs are unequal and unknown. In: ICML 2003 Workshop on Learning from Imbalanced Data Sets II, Washington, DC (2003)
Fawcett, T.: An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters 27, 861–874 (2006)
Ng, W., Dash, M.: An Evaluation of Progressive Sampling for Imbalanced Data Sets. In: Sixth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops, ICDM Workshops 2006, pp. 657–661 (2006)
Provost, F., Fawcett, T.: Robust classification for imprecise environments. Machine Learning 42, 203–231 (2001)
Zeng-Chang, Q.: ROC analysis for predictions made by probabilistic classifiers. In: Proceedings of ICMLC 2005, pp. 3119–3124 (2005)
Witten, I.H., Frank, E.: Data mining: practical machine learning tools and techniques. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2005)
Merz, C., Murphy, P.: UCI Repository of Machine Learning Databases (2006)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Liang, G., Zhang, C. (2011). An Empirical Evaluation of Bagging with Different Algorithms on Imbalanced Data. In: Tang, J., King, I., Chen, L., Wang, J. (eds) Advanced Data Mining and Applications. ADMA 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7120. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25853-4_26
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25853-4_26
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-25852-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-25853-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)