Classifier Technology and the Illusion of Progress
David J. Hand
Abstract
A great many tools have been developed for supervised classification, ranging from early methods such as linear discriminant analysis through to modern developments such as neural networks and support vector machines. A large number of comparative studies have been conducted in attempts to establish the relative superiority of these methods. This paper argues that these comparisons often fail to take into account important aspects of real problems, so that the apparent superiority of more sophisticated methods may be something of an illusion. In particular, simple methods typically yield performance almost as good as more sophisticated methods, to the extent that the difference in performance may be swamped by other sources of uncertainty that generally are not considered in the classical supervised classification paradigm.
Create a lesson
Related papers
Conformal Prediction Through the Lens of Hypothesis Testing: Universality, Impossibility, and Optimality
Ryan J. Tibshirani, Rina Foygel Barber, Aaditya Ramdas
Connecting Riemannian Geometry and Statistical Inference for Correlation Matrices
Argyn Kuketayev
How far can symmetry help? Phase transitions and symmetry selection in sparse functional data analysis
Jocelyn Nembe
Posterior consistency for subdiffusion inverse problems
Haoyu Lu, Shaokang Zu, Junxiong Jia
Dimension comparison for Student's statistic under symmetric unimodality
Jacopo Lenzi
Statistical Properties of Nonparametric MLE under Laplace Noise
Yifei Xiong, Nianqiao Phyllis Ju, Vinayak Rao