Meta-learning is increasingly used to support the recommendation of machine learning algorithms and their configurations. Such recommendations are made based on meta-data, consisting of performance evaluations of algorithms on prior datasets, as well as characterizations of these datasets. These characterizations, also called meta-features, describe properties of the data which are predictive for the performance of machine learning algorithms trained on them. Unfortunately, despite being used in a large number of studies, meta-features are not uniformly described and computed, making many empirical studies irreproducible and hard to compare. This paper aims to remedy this by systematizing and standardizing data characterization measures used in meta-learning, and performing an in-depth analysis of their utility. Moreover, it presents MFE, a new tool for extracting meta-features from datasets and identify more subtle reproducibility issues in the literature, proposing guidelines for data characterization that strengthen reproducible empirical research in meta-learning.

Trying to manage a sprawling, complex data center via manual data input and monitoring can increase the likelihood... You forgot to provide an Email Address. This email address doesn't appear to be valid. This email address is already registered. You have exceeded the maximum character limit.

Abstract-- Extremely preterm infants often require endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation during the first days of life. Due to the detrimental effects of prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), clinicians aim to extubate infants as soon as they deem them ready. Unfortunately, existing strategies for prediction of extubation readiness vary across clinicians and institutions, and lead to high reintubation rates. We present an approach using Random Forest classifiers for the analysis of cardiorespiratory variability to predict extubation readiness. We address the issue of data imbalance by employing random undersampling of examples from the majority class before training each Decision Tree in a bag. By incorporating clinical domain knowledge, we further demonstrate that our classifier could have identified 71% of infants who failed extubation, while maintaining a success detection rate of 78%.

Approximation Trees: Statistical Stability in Model Distillation Yichen Zhou, Zhengze Zhou, Giles Hooker Department of Statistical Science Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853, USA Abstract This paper examines the stability of learned explanations for black-box predictions via model distillation with decision trees. One approach to intelligibility in machine learning is to use an understandable "student" model to mimic the output of an accurate "teacher". Here, we consider the use of regression trees as a student model, in which nodes of the tree can be used as "explanations" for particular predictions, and the whole structure of the tree can be used as a global representation of the resulting function. However, individual trees are sensitive to the particular data sets used to train them, and an interpretation of a student model may be suspect if small changes in the training data have a large effect on it. In this context, access to outcomes from a teacher helps to stabilize the greedy splitting strategy by generating a much larger corpus of training examples than was originally available. We develop tests to ensure that enough examples are generated at each split so that the same splitting rule would be chosen with high probability were the tree to be retrained. Further, we develop a stopping rule to indicate how deep the tree should be built based on recent results on the variability of Random Forests when these are used as the teacher. We provide concrete examples of these procedures on the CAD-MDD and COMPAS data sets. 1 Introduction This paper examines the use of regression trees for model distillation. While Machine Learning has traditionally focused on predictive performance, there has been considerable recent interest in "X-raying the black box": finding methods to make the ways in which neural networks, Random Forests and other predictive models arrive at their predictions understandable to humans. This problem can be approached by creating summaries of these models such as variable importance scores (Breiman, 2001), partial dependence or ICE plots (Friedman, 2001; Goldstein et al., 2013), saliency maps (Simonyan et al., 2013) and other local explanations (Ribeiro et al., 2016). It can also be approached by developing intelligible "student" models which mimic the predictions of the original "teacher" black box: a strategy encompassed by the term model distillation . Within model distillation, common student models are generalized additive models (GAMS: see Lou et al. (2012); Tan et al. (2017), Hooker (2007) provides a link between these and PDPs) and decision trees Breiman et al. (1984); Quinlan (1987), which are our focus. Decision trees have an intelligible graphical representation and can automatically fit complex high-dimensional functions, both of which make them appealing as student models.

Bagging (bootstrap aggregating) regression trees is a technique that can turn a single tree model with high variance and poor predictive power into a fairly accurate prediction function. Unfortunately, bagging regression trees typically suffers from tree correlation, which reduces the overall performance of the model. Random forests are a modification of bagging that builds a large collection of de-correlated trees and have become a very popular "out-of-the-box" learning algorithm that enjoys good predictive performance. This tutorial will cover the fundamentals of random forests. This tutorial serves as an introduction to the random forests.

With the increasing need of personalised decision making, such as personalised medicine and online recommendations, a growing attention has been paid to the discovery of the context and heterogeneity of causal relationships. Most existing methods, however, assume a known cause (e.g. a new drug) and focus on identifying from data the contexts of heterogeneous effects of the cause (e.g. patient groups with different responses to the new drug). There is no approach to efficiently detecting directly from observational data context specific causal relationships, i.e. discovering the causes and their contexts simultaneously. In this paper, by taking the advantages of highly efficient decision tree induction and the well established causal inference framework, we propose the Tree based Context Causal rule discovery (TCC) method, for efficient exploration of context specific causal relationships from data. Experiments with both synthetic and real world data sets show that TCC can effectively discover context specific causal rules from the data.

File: This makes use of the export_graphviz function in Scikit-Learn. There are many parameters here that control the look and information displayed. Take a look at the documentation for specifics. This requires installation of graphviz which includes the dot utility. For the complete options for conversion, take a look at the documentation.

We present the Network-based Biased Tree Ensembles (NetBiTE) method for drug sensitivity prediction and drug sensitivity biomarker identification in cancer using a combination of prior knowledge and gene expression data. Our devised method consists of a biased tree ensemble that is built according to a probabilistic bias weight distribution. The bias weight distribution is obtained from the assignment of high weights to the drug targets and propagating the assigned weights over a protein-protein interaction network such as STRING. The propagation of weights, defines neighborhoods of influence around the drug targets and as such simulates the spread of perturbations within the cell, following drug administration. Using a synthetic dataset, we showcase how application of biased tree ensembles (BiTE) results in significant accuracy gains at a much lower computational cost compared to the unbiased random forests (RF) algorithm. We then apply NetBiTE to the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer (GDSC) dataset and demonstrate that NetBiTE outperforms RF in predicting IC50 drug sensitivity, only for drugs that target membrane receptor pathways (MRPs): RTK, EGFR and IGFR signaling pathways. We propose based on the NetBiTE results, that for drugs that inhibit MRPs, the expression of target genes prior to drug administration is a biomarker for IC50 drug sensitivity following drug administration. We further verify and reinforce this proposition through control studies on, PI3K/MTOR signaling pathway inhibitors, a drug category that does not target MRPs, and through assignment of dummy targets to MRP inhibiting drugs and investigating the variation in NetBiTE accuracy.

Decision trees are one of my favorite models. They are simple, and they are powerful. In fact most high performing Kaggle entries are a combination of XGBoost, which is variant of decision tree, and some very clever feature engineering. The concept behind decision trees is refreshingly straightforward. Imagine creating a data set by recording the time you left your house, and noting whether you arrived at work on time.

From self-driving vehicles and back-flipping robots to virtual assistants who book our next appointment at the hair salon or at that restaurant for dinner - machine learning systems are becoming increasingly ubiquitous. The main reason for this is that these methods boast remarkable predictive capabilities. However, most of these models remain black boxes, meaning that it is very challenging for humans to follow and understand their intricate inner workings. Consequently, interpretability has suffered under this ever-increasing complexity of machine learning models. Especially with regards to new regulations, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the necessity for plausibility and verifiability of predictions made by these black boxes is indispensable. Driven by the needs of industry and practice, the research community has recognised this interpretability problem and focussed on developing a growing number of so-called explanation methods over the past few years. These methods explain individual predictions made by black box machine learning models and help to recover some of the lost interpretability. With the proliferation of these explanation methods, it is, however, often unclear, which explanation method offers a higher explanation quality, or is generally better-suited for the situation at hand. In this thesis, we thus propose an axiomatic framework, which allows comparing the quality of different explanation methods amongst each other. Through experimental validation, we find that the developed framework is useful to assess the explanation quality of different explanation methods and reach conclusions that are consistent with independent research.