The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Empirical Margin Distributions and Bounding the Generalization Error of Combined Classifiers
Open accessAbstract
We prove new probabilistic upper bounds on generalization error of complex classifiers that are combinations of simple classifiers. Such combinations could be implemented by neural networks or by voting methods of combining the classifiers, such as boosting and bagging. The bounds are in terms of the empirical distribution of the margin of the combined classifier. They are based on the methods of the theory of Gaussian and empirical processes (comparison inequalities, symmetrization method, concentration inequalities) and they improve previous results of Bartlett (1998) on bounding the generalization error of neural networks in terms of $\ell_1$-norms of the weights of neurons and of Schapire, Freund, Bartlett and Lee (1998) on bounding the generalization error of boosting. We also obtain rates of convergence in Lévy distance of empirical margin distribution to the true margin distribution uniformly over the classes of classifiers and prove the optimality of these rates.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cortes, C., & Vapnik, V. (1995) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00994018 · Cited by 59,421
Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine
Friedman, J. H. (2001) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1013203451 · Cited by 30,731
Breiman, L. (1996) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00058655 · Cited by 16,325
A Probabilistic Theory of Pattern Recognition
Devroye, L., Györfi, L., & Lugosi, G. (1996) · Stochastic Modelling and Applied Probability · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-0711-5 · Cited by 3,274
Boosting a Weak Learning Algorithm by Majority
Freund, Y. (1995) · Information and Computation · doi:10.1006/inco.1995.1136 · Cited by 1,674
Cited by
(2013) · Cited by 2,056
Concentration Inequalities: A Nonasymptotic Theory of Independence
Boucheron, S., Lugosi, G., & Massart, P. (2013) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199535255.001.0001 · Cited by 1,768
Foundations of Machine Learning
Mohri, M., Rostamizadeh, A., & Talwalkar, A. (2018) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/10290.001.0001 · Cited by 1,122
Interpretable machine learning: Fundamental principles and 10 grand challenges
Rudin, C., Chen, C., Chen, Z., Huang, H., Semenova, L., & Zhong, C. (2022) · Statistics Surveys · doi:10.1214/21-ss133 · Cited by 958
On the depth of deep neural networks: a theoretical view
Sun, S., Chen, W., Wang, L., Liu, X., & Liu, T.-Y. (2016) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v30i1.10243 · Cited by 147
Metadata
- Authors
- Koltchinskii, V., & Panchenko, D.
- Venue
- The Annals of Statistics
- Publisher
- Institute of Mathematical Statistics
- Published
- 2002-02-01
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-50
- ISSN
- 0090-5364 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1608733719
- Cited by
- 451
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 22.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Empirical Margin Distributions and Bounding the Generalization Error of Combined Classifiers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1214/aos/1015362183
- The paper
- Koltchinskii, V., & Panchenko, D. (2002). Empirical Margin Distributions and Bounding the Generalization Error of Combined Classifiers. The Annals of Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1015362183
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.