Jiuyong Li1, Lin Liu1, Jixue Liu1, Ryan Green1. 1. School of Information Technology and Mathematical Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: It is common that a trained classification model is applied to the operating data that is deviated from the training data because of noise. This paper will test an ensemble method, Diversified Multiple Tree (DMT), on its capability for classifying instances in a new laboratory using the classifier built on the instances of another laboratory. METHODS: DMT is tested on three real world biomedical data sets from different laboratories in comparison with four benchmark ensemble methods, AdaBoost, Bagging, Random Forests, and Random Trees. Experiments have also been conducted on studying the limitation of DMT and its possible variations. RESULTS: Experimental results show that DMT is significantly more accurate than other benchmark ensemble classifiers on classifying new instances of a different laboratory from the laboratory where instances are used to build the classifier. CONCLUSIONS: This paper demonstrates that an ensemble classifier, DMT, is more robust in classifying noisy data than other widely used ensemble methods. DMT works on the data set that supports multiple simple trees.
PURPOSE: It is common that a trained classification model is applied to the operating data that is deviated from the training data because of noise. This paper will test an ensemble method, Diversified Multiple Tree (DMT), on its capability for classifying instances in a new laboratory using the classifier built on the instances of another laboratory. METHODS: DMT is tested on three real world biomedical data sets from different laboratories in comparison with four benchmark ensemble methods, AdaBoost, Bagging, Random Forests, and Random Trees. Experiments have also been conducted on studying the limitation of DMT and its possible variations. RESULTS: Experimental results show that DMT is significantly more accurate than other benchmark ensemble classifiers on classifying new instances of a different laboratory from the laboratory where instances are used to build the classifier. CONCLUSIONS: This paper demonstrates that an ensemble classifier, DMT, is more robust in classifying noisy data than other widely used ensemble methods. DMT works on the data set that supports multiple simple trees.
Authors: Robert E Banfield; Lawrence O Hall; Kevin W Bowyer; W P Kegelmeyer Journal: IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 6.226
Authors: Scott L Pomeroy; Pablo Tamayo; Michelle Gaasenbeek; Lisa M Sturla; Michael Angelo; Margaret E McLaughlin; John Y H Kim; Liliana C Goumnerova; Peter M Black; Ching Lau; Jeffrey C Allen; David Zagzag; James M Olson; Tom Curran; Cynthia Wetmore; Jaclyn A Biegel; Tomaso Poggio; Shayan Mukherjee; Ryan Rifkin; Andrea Califano; Gustavo Stolovitzky; David N Louis; Jill P Mesirov; Eric S Lander; Todd R Golub Journal: Nature Date: 2002-01-24 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: A Bhattacharjee; W G Richards; J Staunton; C Li; S Monti; P Vasa; C Ladd; J Beheshti; R Bueno; M Gillette; M Loda; G Weber; E J Mark; E S Lander; W Wong; B E Johnson; T R Golub; D J Sugarbaker; M Meyerson Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2001-11-13 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: M E Garber; O G Troyanskaya; K Schluens; S Petersen; Z Thaesler; M Pacyna-Gengelbach; M van de Rijn; G D Rosen; C M Perou; R I Whyte; R B Altman; P O Brown; D Botstein; I Petersen Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2001-11-13 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Xiao-Jun Ma; Zuncai Wang; Paula D Ryan; Steven J Isakoff; Anne Barmettler; Andrew Fuller; Beth Muir; Gayatry Mohapatra; Ranelle Salunga; J Todd Tuggle; Yen Tran; Diem Tran; Ana Tassin; Paul Amon; Wilson Wang; Wei Wang; Edward Enright; Kimberly Stecker; Eden Estepa-Sabal; Barbara Smith; Jerry Younger; Ulysses Balis; James Michaelson; Atul Bhan; Karleen Habin; Thomas M Baer; Joan Brugge; Daniel A Haber; Mark G Erlander; Dennis C Sgroi Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Xin Chen; Siu Tim Cheung; Samuel So; Sheung Tat Fan; Christopher Barry; John Higgins; Kin-Man Lai; Jiafu Ji; Sandrine Dudoit; Irene O L Ng; Matt Van De Rijn; David Botstein; Patrick O Brown Journal: Mol Biol Cell Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 4.138
Authors: David G Beer; Sharon L R Kardia; Chiang-Ching Huang; Thomas J Giordano; Albert M Levin; David E Misek; Lin Lin; Guoan Chen; Tarek G Gharib; Dafydd G Thomas; Michelle L Lizyness; Rork Kuick; Satoru Hayasaka; Jeremy M G Taylor; Mark D Iannettoni; Mark B Orringer; Samir Hanash Journal: Nat Med Date: 2002-07-15 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Dinesh Singh; Phillip G Febbo; Kenneth Ross; Donald G Jackson; Judith Manola; Christine Ladd; Pablo Tamayo; Andrew A Renshaw; Anthony V D'Amico; Jerome P Richie; Eric S Lander; Massimo Loda; Philip W Kantoff; Todd R Golub; William R Sellers Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 31.743