Cited by 612Statistical Methods and InferenceStatistical Methods and ApplicationsMachine Learning and Algorithms

Consistency of random forests

Open access
Scornet, Erwan, Biau, Gérard, Vert, Jean-Philippe·2015·The Annals of Statistics

Abstract

Random forests are a learning algorithm proposed by Breiman [ Mach. Learn. 45 (2001) 5–32] that combines several randomized decision trees and aggregates their predictions by averaging. Despite its wide usage and outstanding practical performance, little is known about the mathematical properties of the procedure. This disparity between theory and practice originates in the difficulty to simultaneously analyze both the randomization process and the highly data-dependent tree structure. In the present paper, we take a step forward in forest exploration by proving a consistency result for Breiman’s [ Mach. Learn. 45 (2001) 5–32] original algorithm in the context of additive regression models. Our analysis also sheds an interesting light on how random forests can nicely adapt to sparsity.

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 · 10.1214/15-aos1321

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Scornet et al. (2015) show that Breiman's (2001) forests are consistent in an additive regression framework.

    “Scornet et al. (2015), who show that Breiman's (2001) forests are consistent in an additive regression framework.”

    From A random forest guided tour (2016) · cites this paper as Scornet et al. (2015)

  • Scornet et al. (2015) show that random forests asymptotically perform, with high probability, splits along the S informative variables.

    “It is shown in Scornet et al. (2015) that random forests asymptotically perform, with high probability, splits along the S informative variables (in the sense of Section 3.1).”

    From A random forest guided tour (2016) · cites this paper as Scornet et al. (2015)

  • Assuming regularity conditions and considering a modification of Breiman's forests in which all directions are preselected for splitting, Scornet et al. (2015) prove that, with probability 1-ξ, for all n large enough and all 1 ≤ q ≤ k, the first k cut directions are among the S informative variables.

    “Assuming some regularity conditions on the regression model, and considering a modification of Breiman's forests in which all directions are preselected for splitting, Scornet et al. (2015) prove that, with probability 1 -ξ , for all n large enough and all 1 ≤ q ≤ k ,”

    From A random forest guided tour (2016) · cites this paper as Scornet et al. (2015)

  • Scornet et al. (2015) proved a consistency result in the context of additive regression models for the pruned version of Breiman's forest.

    “Scornet et al. (2015) proved a consistency result in the context of additive regression models for the pruned version of Breiman's forest.”

    From A random forest guided tour (2016) · cites this paper as Scornet et al. (2015)

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. BOUCHERON, S., LUGOSI, G. and MASSART, P. (2013). Concentration Inequalities: A Nonasymp- totic Theory of Independence. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.
  2. POLITIS, D. N., ROMANO, J. P. and WOLF, M. (1999). Subsampling. Springer, New York.
  3. SCORNET, E., BIAU, G. and VERT, J. (2015). Supplement to "Consistency of random forests." DOI:10.1214/15-AOS1321SUPP. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scornet, E., Biau, G., & Vert, J.-P.
Affiliations
  • Sorbonne Université (FR)
  • Université Paris Sciences et Lettres (FR)
Venue
The Annals of Statistics
Published
2015-08-01
Volume
43
Issue
4
Pages
1716-1741
ISSN
  • 0090-5364 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-8966
OpenAlex
W2162387923
Cited by
612
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 59 · 2025: 76 · 2024: 72 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 67 · 2021: 67 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 3
FWCI
23.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Annals of Statistics (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Project Euclid (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Algorithms
Keywords
random forest, consistency, additive regression, randomized decision trees, tree structure

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