Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 228

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Decision Forest: Combining the Predictions of Multiple Independent Decision Tree Models

Tong, Weida, Hong, Huixiao, Fang, Hong, Xie, Qian, Perkins, Roger·2003·Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences

Abstract

The techniques of combining the results of multiple classification models to produce a single prediction have been investigated for many years. In earlier applications, the multiple models to be combined were developed by altering the training set. The use of these so-called resampling techniques, however, poses the risk of reducing predictivity of the individual models to be combined and/or over fitting the noise in the data, which might result in poorer prediction of the composite model than the individual models. In this paper, we suggest a novel approach, named Decision Forest, that combines multiple Decision Tree models. Each Decision Tree model is developed using a unique set of descriptors. When models of similar predictive quality are combined using the Decision Forest method, quality compared to the individual models is consistently and significantly improved in both training and testing steps. An example will be presented for prediction of binding affinity of 232 chemicals to the estrogen receptor.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ci020058s

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Tong, W., Hong, H., Fang, H., Xie, Q., & Perkins, R.
Venue
Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences
Published
2003-02-04
Volume
43
Issue
2
Pages
525-531
ISSN
  • 0095-2338 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5142
OpenAlex
W2021070595
Cited by
228
References
4
FWCI
13.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.