This paper compares the performances of three supervised machine learning algorithms in terms of predictive ability and model interpretation on structured or tabular data. The algorithms considered were scikit-learn implementations of extreme gradient boosting machines (XGB) and random forests (RFs), and feedforward neural networks (FFNNs) from TensorFlow. The paper is organized in a findings-based manner, with each section providing general conclusions supported by empirical results from simulation studies that cover a wide range of model complexity and correlation structures among predictors. We considered both continuous and binary responses of different sample sizes. Overall, XGB and FFNNs were competitive, with FFNNs showing better performance in smooth models and tree-based boosting algorithms performing better in non-smooth models. This conclusion held generally for predictive performance, identification of important variables, and determining correct input-output relationships as measured by partial dependence plots (PDPs). FFNNs generally had less over-fitting, as measured by the difference in performance between training and testing datasets. However, the difference with XGB was often small. RFs did not perform well in general, confirming the findings in the literature. All models exhibited different degrees of bias seen in PDPs, but the bias was especially problematic for RFs. The extent of the biases varied with correlation among predictors, response type, and data set sample size. In general, tree-based models tended to over-regularize the fitted model in the tails of predictor distributions. Finally, as to be expected, performances were better for continuous responses compared to binary data and with larger samples.

It is evident that Machine Learning (ML) has touched all walks of our lives! From checking the weather forecast to applying for a loan or a credit card, ML is used in almost every aspect of our daily life. In this chapter, ML is explored in terms of algorithms and applications. Special consideration is given to ML applications in the financial data analytics domain including stock market analysis, fraud detection in financial transactions, credit risk analysis, loan defaulting rate analysis, and profit–loss analysis. The chapter establishes the significance of Random Forests as an effective machine learning method for a wide variety of financial applications.

With the increase of data volume and the continuous development in deep learning, although more and more traditional machine learning techniques are outperformed by artificial neural networks, tree-based methods are still popular. Random forest (Breiman, 2001) is commonly used as a benchmark to evaluate the performance of nonparametric models, while XGBoost (Chen and Guestrin, 2016) performs well in Kaggle competitions and often competes with artificial neural networks. Also, instead of relying on a specific method, people prefer to make decisions based on a combination of multiple models, which shows a better performance than a single one. Therefore, identifying the importance of each model by weights assignment is critical.

The model based response propensity approach used a machine learning method called the random forests with regression trees method.

Random Forest is a supervised machine learning algorithm that is composed of individual decision trees. This type of model is called an ensemble model because an "ensemble" of independent models is used to compute a result. The basis for the Random Forest is formed by many individual decision trees, the so-called Decision Trees. A tree consists of different decision levels and branches, which are used to classify data. The Decision Tree algorithm tries to divide the training data into different classes so that the objects within a class are as similar as possible and the objects of different classes are as different as possible. This tree helps to decide whether to do sports outside or not, depending on the weather variables "weather", "humidity" and "wind force".

In this paper, we utilize a machine learning approach to identify the significant pathways for c-di-GMP signaling proteins. The dataset involves gene counts from 12 pathways and 5 essential c-di-GMP binding domains for 1024 bacterial genomes. Two novel approaches, Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso) and Random forests, have been applied for analyzing and modeling the dataset. Both approaches show that bacterial chemotaxis is the most essential pathway for c-di-GMP encoding domains. Though popular for feature selection, the strong regularization of Lasso method fails to associate any pathway to MshE domain. Results from the analysis may help to understand and emphasize the supporting pathways involved in bacterial cellulose production. These findings demonstrate the need for a chassis to restrict the behavior or functionality by deactivating the selective pathways in cellulose production.

Survival random forest is a popular machine learning tool for modeling censored survival data. However, there is currently no statistically valid and computationally feasible approach for estimating its confidence band. This paper proposes an unbiased confidence band estimation by extending recent developments in infinite-order incomplete U-statistics. The idea is to estimate the variance-covariance matrix of the cumulative hazard function prediction on a grid of time points. We then generate the confidence band by viewing the cumulative hazard function estimation as a Gaussian process whose distribution can be approximated through simulation. This approach is computationally easy to implement when the subsampling size of a tree is no larger than half of the total training sample size. Numerical studies show that our proposed method accurately estimates the confidence band and achieves desired coverage rate. We apply this method to veterans' administration lung cancer data.

AI is increasingly used in making decisions that impact us directly such as job applications, our credit rating, match-making on dating sites. So it is important that AI is non-discriminatory and that decisions do not favor certain races, gender, the color of skin. Discriminatory AI is a very wide subject going beyond purely technical aspects. However, to make it easily understandable, I will demonstrate how discriminatory AI looks using examples and visuals. This will give you a way to spot a discriminatory AI. Let me first establish the context of the example.

Evidence from observational studies has become increasingly important for supporting healthcare policy making via cost-effectiveness (CE) analyses. Similar as in comparative effectiveness studies, health economic evaluations that consider subject-level heterogeneity produce individualized treatment rules (ITRs) that are often more cost-effective than one-size-fits-all treatment. Thus, it is of great interest to develop statistical tools for learning such a cost-effective ITR (CE-ITR) under the causal inference framework that allows proper handling of potential confounding and can be applied to both trials and observational studies. In this paper, we use the concept of net-monetary-benefit (NMB) to assess the trade-off between health benefits and related costs. We estimate CE-ITR as a function of patients' characteristics that, when implemented, optimizes the allocation of limited healthcare resources by maximizing health gains while minimizing treatment-related costs. We employ the conditional random forest approach and identify the optimal CE-ITR using NMB-based classification algorithms, where two partitioned estimators are proposed for the subject-specific weights to effectively incorporate information from censored individuals. We conduct simulation studies to evaluate the performance of our proposals. We apply our top-performing algorithm to the NIH-funded Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) to illustrate the CE gains of assigning customized intensive blood pressure therapy.

Neural networks are extremely convenient. They are usable for both regression and classification, work on structured and unstructured data, handle temporal data very well, and can usually reach high performances if they are given a sufficient amount of data. What is gained in convenience is, however, lost in interpretability and that can be a major setback when models are presented to a non-technical audience, such as clients or stakeholders. For instance, last year, the Data Science team I am part of wanted to convince a client to go from a decision tree model to a neural network, and for good reasons: we had access to a large amount of data and most of it was temporal. The client was on board, but wanted to keep an understanding of what the model based its decisions on, which means evaluating its features' importance.