Improved Random Forest for Classification
Abstract
We propose an improved random forest classifier that performs classification with minimum number of trees. The proposed method iteratively removes some unimportant features. Based on the number of important and unimportant features, we formulate a novel theoretical upper limit on the number of trees to be added to the forest to ensure improvement in classification accuracy. Our algorithm converges with a reduced but important set of features. We prove that further addition of trees or further reduction of features does not improve classification performance. The efficacy of the proposed approach is demonstrated through experiments on benchmark datasets. We further use the proposed classifier to detect mitotic nuclei in the histopathological datasets of breast tissues. We also apply our method on the industrial dataset of dual phase steel microstructures to classify different phases. Results of our method on different datasets show significant reduction in average classification error compared to a number of competing methods.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
RF's parallelization capability results in high computational efficiency, markedly reducing training time.
“Moreover, RF’s parallelization capability results in high computational efficiency, markedly reducing training time (78).”
From Machine learning-based risk predictive models for diabetic kidney disease in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2025) · cites this paper as [78]
Cites
Breiman, L. (2001) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1010933404324 · Cited by 133,538 · see citing works
Ensemble methods in machine learning
Dietterich, T. G. (2000) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/3-540-45014-9_1 · Cited by 8,408 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Machine learning for microalgae detection and utilization
Ning, H., Li, R., & Zhou, T. (2022) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.947394 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Wang, Y., Wang, Z., Yu, X., Wang, X., Song, J., Yu, D.-J., & Ge, F. (2024) · Briefings in Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bib/bbae658 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Li, Y., Jin, N., Zhan, Q., Huang, Y., Sun, A., Yin, F., Li, Z., Hu, J., & Liu, Z. (2025) · Frontiers in Endocrinology · doi:10.3389/fendo.2025.1495306 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
“Moreover, RF ’ s parallelization capability results in high computational ef fi ciency, markedly reducing training time (78).”
- Authors
- Paul, A., Mukherjee, D. P., Das, P., Gangopadhyay, A., Chintha, A. R., & Kundu, S.
- Affiliations
- Indian Statistical Institute (IN)
- Arizona State University (US)
- Tata Steel (India) (IN)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Image Processing
- Published
- 2018-08
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 4012-4024
- ISSN
- 1057-7149 (ISSN-L)
- 1941-0042
- OpenAlex
- W2802502226
- Cited by
- 483
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 50 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 95 · 2023: 97 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 12.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- random forest, number of trees, feature selection, feature importance, breast histopathology, phase classification
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