Cargando…
Calibrating random forests for probability estimation
Probabilities can be consistently estimated using random forests. It is, however, unclear how random forests should be updated to make predictions for other centers or at different time points. In this work, we present two approaches for updating random forests for probability estimation. The first...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5074325/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27074747 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.6959 |
_version_ | 1782461714419154944 |
---|---|
author | Dankowski, Theresa Ziegler, Andreas |
author_facet | Dankowski, Theresa Ziegler, Andreas |
author_sort | Dankowski, Theresa |
collection | PubMed |
description | Probabilities can be consistently estimated using random forests. It is, however, unclear how random forests should be updated to make predictions for other centers or at different time points. In this work, we present two approaches for updating random forests for probability estimation. The first method has been proposed by Elkan and may be used for updating any machine learning approach yielding consistent probabilities, so‐called probability machines. The second approach is a new strategy specifically developed for random forests. Using the terminal nodes, which represent conditional probabilities, the random forest is first translated to logistic regression models. These are, in turn, used for re‐calibration. The two updating strategies were compared in a simulation study and are illustrated with data from the German Stroke Study Collaboration. In most simulation scenarios, both methods led to similar improvements. In the simulation scenario in which the stricter assumptions of Elkan's method were not met, the logistic regression‐based re‐calibration approach for random forests outperformed Elkan's method. It also performed better on the stroke data than Elkan's method. The strength of Elkan's method is its general applicability to any probability machine. However, if the strict assumptions underlying this approach are not met, the logistic regression‐based approach is preferable for updating random forests for probability estimation. © 2016 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5074325 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50743252016-11-04 Calibrating random forests for probability estimation Dankowski, Theresa Ziegler, Andreas Stat Med Research Articles Probabilities can be consistently estimated using random forests. It is, however, unclear how random forests should be updated to make predictions for other centers or at different time points. In this work, we present two approaches for updating random forests for probability estimation. The first method has been proposed by Elkan and may be used for updating any machine learning approach yielding consistent probabilities, so‐called probability machines. The second approach is a new strategy specifically developed for random forests. Using the terminal nodes, which represent conditional probabilities, the random forest is first translated to logistic regression models. These are, in turn, used for re‐calibration. The two updating strategies were compared in a simulation study and are illustrated with data from the German Stroke Study Collaboration. In most simulation scenarios, both methods led to similar improvements. In the simulation scenario in which the stricter assumptions of Elkan's method were not met, the logistic regression‐based re‐calibration approach for random forests outperformed Elkan's method. It also performed better on the stroke data than Elkan's method. The strength of Elkan's method is its general applicability to any probability machine. However, if the strict assumptions underlying this approach are not met, the logistic regression‐based approach is preferable for updating random forests for probability estimation. © 2016 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-04-13 2016-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC5074325/ /pubmed/27074747 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.6959 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Dankowski, Theresa Ziegler, Andreas Calibrating random forests for probability estimation |
title | Calibrating random forests for probability estimation |
title_full | Calibrating random forests for probability estimation |
title_fullStr | Calibrating random forests for probability estimation |
title_full_unstemmed | Calibrating random forests for probability estimation |
title_short | Calibrating random forests for probability estimation |
title_sort | calibrating random forests for probability estimation |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5074325/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27074747 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.6959 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dankowskitheresa calibratingrandomforestsforprobabilityestimation AT zieglerandreas calibratingrandomforestsforprobabilityestimation |