AdaBoost (short forAdaptiveBoosting) is astatistical classificationmeta-algorithm formulated byYoav Freund andRobert Schapire in 1995, who won the 2003Gödel Prize for their work. It can be used in conjunction with many types of learning algorithm to improve performance. The output of multipleweak learners is combined into a weighted sum that represents the final output of the boosted classifier. Usually, AdaBoost is presented forbinary classification, although it can be generalized to multiple classes or bounded intervals ofreal values.^[1][2]

AdaBoost is adaptive in the sense that subsequent weak learners (models) are adjusted in favor of instances misclassified by previous models. In some problems, it can be less susceptible tooverfitting than other learning algorithms. The individual learners can be weak, but as long as the performance of each one is slightly better than random guessing, the final model can be proven to converge to a strong learner.

Although AdaBoost is typically used to combine weak base learners (such asdecision stumps), it has been shown to also effectively combine strong base learners (such as deeperdecision trees), producing an even more accurate model.^[3]

Every learning algorithm tends to suit some problem types better than others, and typically has many different parameters and configurations to adjust before it achieves optimal performance on adataset. AdaBoost (with decision trees as the weak learners) is often referred to as the best out-of-the-box classifier.^[4][5] When used with decision tree learning, information gathered at each stage of the AdaBoost algorithm about the relative 'hardness' of each training sample is fed into the tree-growing algorithm such that later trees tend to focus on harder-to-classify examples.

AdaBoost refers to a particular method of training a boosted classifier. A boosted classifier is a classifier of the form$${\displaystyle F_T(x)=\sum _{t=1}^T{f}_t(x)}$$where each${\displaystyle f_t}$ is a weak learner that takes an object${\displaystyle x}$ as input and returns a value indicating the class of the object. For example, in the two-class problem, the sign of the weak learner's output identifies the predicted object class and the absolute value gives the confidence in that classification.

Each weak learner produces an output hypothesis${\displaystyle h}$ which fixes a prediction${\displaystyle h(x_i)}$ for each sample in the training set. At each iteration${\displaystyle t}$, a weak learner is selected and assigned a coefficient${\displaystyle {\alpha }_t}$ such that the total training error${\displaystyle E_t}$ of the resulting${\displaystyle t}$-stage boosted classifier is minimized.

$${\displaystyle E_t=\sum _{i}E[F_{t-1}(x_i)+{\alpha }_{t}h(x_i)]}$$

Here${\displaystyle F_{t-1}(x)}$ is the boosted classifier that has been built up to the previous stage of training and${\displaystyle f_t(x)={\alpha }_{t}h(x)}$ is the weak learner that is being considered for addition to the final classifier.

At each iteration of the training process, a weight${\displaystyle w_{i,t}}$ is assigned to each sample in the training set equal to the current error${\displaystyle E(F_{t-1}(x_i))}$ on that sample. These weights can be used in the training of the weak learner. For instance, decision trees can be grown which favor the splitting of sets of samples with large weights.

This derivation follows Rojas (2009):^[6]

Suppose we have a data set${\displaystyle \{(x_1,y_1),\dots ,(x_N,y_N)\}}$ where each item${\displaystyle x_i}$ has an associated class${\displaystyle y_i\in \{-1,1\}}$, and a set of weak classifiers${\displaystyle \{k_1,\dots ,k_L\}}$ each of which outputs a classification${\displaystyle k_j(x_i)\in \{-1,1\}}$ for each item. After the${\displaystyle (m-1)}$-th iteration our boosted classifier is a linear combination of the weak classifiers of the form:$${\displaystyle C_{(m-1)}(x_i)={\alpha }_1{k}_1(x_i)+\cdots +{\alpha }_{m-1}{k}_{m-1}(x_i),}$$where the class will be the sign of${\displaystyle C_{(m-1)}(x_i)}$. At the${\displaystyle m}$-th iteration we want to extend this to a better boosted classifier by adding another weak classifier${\displaystyle k_m}$, with another weight${\displaystyle {\alpha }_m}$:$${\displaystyle C_m(x_i)=C_{(m-1)}(x_i)+{\alpha }_m{k}_m(x_i)}$$

So it remains to determine which weak classifier is the best choice for${\displaystyle k_m}$, and what its weight${\displaystyle {\alpha }_m}$ should be. We define the total error${\displaystyle E}$ of${\displaystyle C_m}$ as the sum of itsexponential loss on each data point, given as follows:$${\displaystyle E=\sum _{i=1}^N{e}^{-y_i{C}_m(x_i)}=\sum _{i=1}^N{e}^{-y_i{C}_{(m-1)}(x_i)}{e}^{-y_i{\alpha }_m{k}_m(x_i)}}$$

Letting${\displaystyle w_i^{(1)}=1}$ and${\displaystyle w_i^{(m)}=e^{-y_i{C}_{m-1}(x_i)}}$ for${\displaystyle m>1}$, we have:$${\displaystyle E=\sum _{i=1}^N{w}_i^{(m)}{e}^{-y_i{\alpha }_m{k}_m(x_i)}}$$

We can split this summation between those data points that are correctly classified by${\displaystyle k_m}$ (so${\displaystyle y_i{k}_m(x_i)=1}$) and those that are misclassified (so${\displaystyle y_i{k}_m(x_i)=-1}$):

Since the only part of the right-hand side of this equation that depends on${\displaystyle k_m}$ is$\sum _{y_i\ne k_m(x_i)}{w}_i^{(m)}$, we see that the${\displaystyle k_m}$ that minimizes${\displaystyle E}$ is the one in the set${\displaystyle \{k_1,\dots ,k_L\}}$ that minimizes$\sum _{y_i\ne k_m(x_i)}{w}_i^{(m)}$ [assuming that${\displaystyle {\alpha }_m>0}$], i.e. the weak classifier with the lowest weighted error (with weights${\displaystyle w_i^{(m)}=e^{-y_i{C}_{m-1}(x_i)}}$).

To determine the desired weight${\displaystyle {\alpha }_m}$ that minimizes${\displaystyle E}$ with the${\displaystyle k_m}$ that we just determined, we differentiate:$${\displaystyle \frac{dE}{d{\alpha }_m}=\frac{d(\sum _{y_i=k_m(x_i)}{w}_i^{(m)}{e}^{-{\alpha }_m}+\sum _{y_i\ne k_m(x_i)}{w}_i^{(m)}{e}^{{\alpha }_m})}{d{\alpha }_m}}$$

The value of${\displaystyle {\alpha }_m}$ that minimizes the above expression is:$${\displaystyle {\alpha }_m=\frac{1}{2}\ln \left(\frac{\sum _{y_i=k_m(x_i)}{w}_i^{(m)}}{\sum _{y_i\ne k_m(x_i)}{w}_i^{(m)}}\right)}$$

We calculate the weighted error rate of the weak classifier to be${\displaystyle {ϵ}_m=\frac{\sum _{y_i\ne k_m(x_i)}{w}_i^{(m)}}{\sum _{i=1}^N{w}_i^{(m)}}}$, so it follows that:$${\displaystyle {\alpha }_m=\frac{1}{2}\ln \left(\frac{1-{ϵ}_m}{{ϵ}_m}\right)}$$which is the negative logit function multiplied by 0.5. Due to the convexity of${\displaystyle E}$ as a function of${\displaystyle {\alpha }_m}$, this new expression for${\displaystyle {\alpha }_m}$ gives the global minimum of the loss function.

Note: This derivation only applies when${\displaystyle k_m(x_i)\in \{-1,1\}}$, though it can be a good starting guess in other cases, such as when the weak learner is biased (${\displaystyle k_m(x)\in \{a,b\},a\ne -b}$), has multiple leaves (${\displaystyle k_m(x)\in \{a,b,\dots ,n\}}$) or is some other function${\displaystyle k_m(x)\in \mathbb{R}}$.

Thus we have derived the AdaBoost algorithm: At each iteration, choose the classifier${\displaystyle k_m}$, which minimizes the total weighted error$\sum _{y_i\ne k_m(x_i)}{w}_i^{(m)}$, use this to calculate the error rate${\displaystyle {ϵ}_m=\frac{\sum _{y_i\ne k_m(x_i)}{w}_i^{(m)}}{\sum _{i=1}^N{w}_i^{(m)}}}$, use this to calculate the weight${\displaystyle {\alpha }_m=\frac{1}{2}\ln \left(\frac{1-{ϵ}_m}{{ϵ}_m}\right)}$, and finally use this to improve the boosted classifier${\displaystyle C_{m-1}}$ to${\displaystyle C_m=C_{(m-1)}+{\alpha }_m{k}_m}$.

This sectionneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.(May 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Boosting is a form of linearregression in which the features of each sample${\displaystyle x_i}$ are the outputs of some weak learner${\displaystyle h}$ applied to${\displaystyle x_i}$.

While regression tries to fit${\displaystyle F(x)}$ to${\displaystyle y(x)}$ as precisely as possible without loss of generalization, typically usingleast square error${\displaystyle E(f)=(y(x)-f(x){)}^2}$, whereas the AdaBoost error function${\displaystyle E(f)=e^{-y(x)f(x)}}$ takes into account the fact that only the sign of the final result is used, thus${\displaystyle |F(x)|}$ can be far larger than 1 without increasing error. However, the exponential increase in the error for sample${\displaystyle x_i}$ as${\displaystyle -y(x_i)f(x_i)}$ increases, resulting in excessive weights being assigned to outliers.

One feature of the choice of exponential error function is that the error of the final additive model is the product of the error of each stage, that is,${\displaystyle e^{\sum _i-y_{i}f(x_i)}=\prod _i{e}^{-y_{i}f(x_i)}}$. Thus it can be seen that the weight update in the AdaBoost algorithm is equivalent to recalculating the error on${\displaystyle F_t(x)}$ after each stage.

There is a lot of flexibility allowed in the choice of loss function. As long as the loss function ismonotonic andcontinuously differentiable, the classifier is always driven toward purer solutions.^[7] Zhang (2004) provides a loss function based on least squares, a modifiedHuber loss function:

This function is more well-behaved than LogitBoost for${\displaystyle f(x)}$ close to 1 or -1, does not penalise ‘overconfident’ predictions (${\displaystyle yf(x)>1}$), unlike unmodified least squares, and only penalises samples misclassified with confidence greater than 1 linearly, as opposed to quadratically or exponentially, and is thus less susceptible to the effects of outliers.

Boosting can be seen as minimization of aconvex loss function over aconvex set of functions.^[8] Specifically, the loss being minimized by AdaBoost is the exponential loss$${\displaystyle \sum _i\varphi (i,y,f)=\sum _i{e}^{-y_{i}f(x_i)},}$$whereas LogitBoost performs logistic regression, minimizing$${\displaystyle \sum _i\varphi (i,y,f)=\sum _i\ln \left(1+e^{-y_{i}f(x_i)}\right).}$$

In the gradient descent analogy, the output of the classifier for each training point is considered a point${\displaystyle \left(F_t(x_1),\dots ,F_t(x_n)\right)}$ in n-dimensional space, where each axis corresponds to a training sample, each weak learner${\displaystyle h(x)}$ corresponds to a vector of fixed orientation and length, and the goal is to reach the target point${\displaystyle (y_1,\dots ,y_n)}$ (or any region where the value of loss function${\displaystyle E_T(x_1,\dots ,x_n)}$ is less than the value at that point), in the fewest steps. Thus AdaBoost algorithms perform eitherCauchy (find${\displaystyle h(x)}$ with the steepest gradient, choose${\displaystyle \alpha }$ to minimize test error) orNewton (choose some target point, find${\displaystyle \alpha h(x)}$ that brings${\displaystyle F_t}$ closest to that point) optimization of training error.

With:

• Samples${\displaystyle x_1\dots x_n}$
• Desired outputs${\displaystyle y_1\dots y_n,y\in \{-1,1\}}$
• Initial weights${\displaystyle w_{1,1}\dots w_{n,1}}$ set to${\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}$
• Error function${\displaystyle E(f(x),y_i)=e^{-y_{i}f(x_i)}}$
• Weak learners${\displaystyle h:x\to \{-1,1\}}$

For${\displaystyle t}$ in${\displaystyle 1\dots T}$:

• Choose${\displaystyle h_t(x)}$:
  • Find weak learner${\displaystyle h_t(x)}$ that minimizes${\displaystyle {ϵ}_t}$, the weighted sum error for misclassified points${\displaystyle {ϵ}_t=\sum _{\stackrel{i=1}{h_t(x_i)\ne y_i}}^n{w}_{i,t}}$
  • Choose${\displaystyle {\alpha }_t=\frac{1}{2}\ln \left(\frac{1-{ϵ}_t}{{ϵ}_t}\right)}$
• Add to ensemble:
  • ${\displaystyle F_t(x)=F_{t-1}(x)+{\alpha }_t{h}_t(x)}$
• Update weights:
  • ${\displaystyle w_{i,t+1}=w_{i,t}{e}^{-y_i{\alpha }_t{h}_t(x_i)}}$ for${\displaystyle i}$ in${\displaystyle 1\dots n}$
  • Renormalize${\displaystyle w_{i,t+1}}$ such that${\displaystyle \sum _i{w}_{i,t+1}=1}$
  • (Note: It can be shown that${\displaystyle \frac{\sum _{h_t(x_i)=y_i}{w}_{i,t+1}}{\sum _{h_t(x_i)\ne y_i}{w}_{i,t+1}}=\frac{\sum _{h_t(x_i)=y_i}{w}_{i,t}}{\sum _{h_t(x_i)\ne y_i}{w}_{i,t}}}$ at every step, which can simplify the calculation of the new weights.)

The output of decision trees is a class probability estimate${\displaystyle p(x)=P(y=1|x)}$, the probability that${\displaystyle x}$ is in the positive class.^[7] Friedman, Hastie and Tibshirani derive an analytical minimizer for${\displaystyle e^{-y\left(F_{t-1}(x)+f_t(p(x))\right)}}$ for some fixed${\displaystyle p(x)}$ (typically chosen using weighted least squares error):

${\displaystyle f_t(x)=\frac{1}{2}\ln \left(\frac{x}{1-x}\right)}$.

Thus, rather than multiplying the output of the entire tree by some fixed value, each leaf node is changed to output half thelogit transform of its previous value.

LogitBoost represents an application of establishedlogistic regression techniques to the AdaBoost method. Rather than minimizing error with respect to y, weak learners are chosen to minimize the (weighted least-squares) error of${\displaystyle f_t(x)}$ with respect to$${\displaystyle z_t=\frac{y^{\ast }-p_t(x)}{2p_t(x)(1-p_t(x))},}$$where$${\displaystyle p_t(x)=\frac{e^{F_{t-1}(x)}}{e^{F_{t-1}(x)}+e^{-F_{t-1}(x)}},}$$$${\displaystyle w_t=p_t(x)(1-p_t(x))}$$$${\displaystyle y^{\ast }=\frac{y+1}{2}.}$$

That is${\displaystyle z_t}$ is theNewton–Raphson approximation of the minimizer of the log-likelihood error at stage${\displaystyle t}$, and the weak learner${\displaystyle f_t}$ is chosen as the learner that best approximates${\displaystyle z_t}$ by weighted least squares.

As p approaches either 1 or 0, the value of${\displaystyle p_t(x_i)(1-p_t(x_i))}$ becomes very small and thez term, which is large for misclassified samples, can becomenumerically unstable, due to machine precision rounding errors. This can be overcome by enforcing some limit on the absolute value ofz and the minimum value of w

While previous boosting algorithms choose${\displaystyle f_t}$ greedily, minimizing the overall test error as much as possible at each step, GentleBoost features a bounded step size.${\displaystyle f_t}$ is chosen to minimize$\sum _i{w}_{t,i}(y_i-f_t(x_i){)}^2$, and no further coefficient is applied. Thus, in the case where a weak learner exhibits perfect classification performance, GentleBoost chooses${\displaystyle f_t(x)={\alpha }_t{h}_t(x)}$ exactly equal to${\displaystyle y}$, while steepest descent algorithms try to set${\displaystyle {\alpha }_t=\mathrm{\infty }}$. Empirical observations about the good performance of GentleBoost appear to back up Schapire and Singer's remark that allowing excessively large values of${\displaystyle \alpha }$ can lead to poor generalization performance.^[9][10]

A technique for speeding up processing of boosted classifiers, early termination refers to only testing each potential object with as many layers of the final classifier necessary to meet some confidence threshold, speeding up computation for cases where the class of the object can easily be determined. One such scheme is the object detection framework introduced by Viola and Jones:^[11] in an application with significantly more negative samples than positive, a cascade of separate boost classifiers is trained, the output of each stage biased such that some acceptably small fraction of positive samples is mislabeled as negative, and all samples marked as negative after each stage are discarded. If 50% of negative samples are filtered out by each stage, only a very small number of objects would pass through the entire classifier, reducing computation effort. This method has since been generalized, with a formula provided for choosing optimal thresholds at each stage to achieve some desired false positive and false negative rate.^[12]

In the field of statistics, where AdaBoost is more commonly applied to problems of moderate dimensionality,early stopping is used as a strategy to reduceoverfitting.^[13] A validation set of samples is separated from the training set, performance of the classifier on the samples used for training is compared to performance on the validation samples, and training is terminated if performance on the validation sample is seen to decrease even as performance on the training set continues to improve.

For steepest descent versions of AdaBoost, where${\displaystyle {\alpha }_t}$ is chosen at each layert to minimize test error, the next layer added is said to bemaximally independent of layert:^[14] it is unlikely to choose a weak learnert+1 that is similar to learnert. However, there remains the possibility thatt+1 produces similar information to some other earlier layer. Totally corrective algorithms, such asLPBoost, optimize the value of every coefficient after each step, such that new layers added are always maximally independent of every previous layer. This can be accomplished by backfitting,linear programming or some other method.

Pruning is the process of removing poorly performing weak classifiers to improve memory and execution-time cost of the boosted classifier. The simplest methods, which can be particularly effective in conjunction with totally corrective training, are weight- or margin-trimming: when the coefficient, or the contribution to the total test error, of some weak classifier falls below a certain threshold, that classifier is dropped. Margineantu & Dietterich^[15] suggested an alternative criterion for trimming: weak classifiers should be selected such that the diversity of the ensemble is maximized. If two weak learners produce very similar outputs, efficiency can be improved by removing one of them and increasing the coefficient of the remaining weak learner.^[16]

• Bootstrap aggregating
• CoBoosting
• BrownBoost
• Gradient boosting
• Multiplicative weight update method § AdaBoost algorithm

• Classification algorithms
• Ensemble learning

• CS1 errors: missing periodical
• Articles with short description
• Short description is different from Wikidata
• Articles needing additional references from May 2016
• All articles needing additional references