The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Foundations of Machine Learning
Open accessAbstract
Foundations of Machine LearningSoon we will embark on a theoretical study of AdaBoost in order to understand its properties, particularly its ability as a learning algorithm to generalize, that is, to make accurate predictions on data not seen during training.Before this will be possible, however, it will be necessary to take a step back to outline our approach to the more general problem of machine learning, including some fundamental general-purpose tools that will be invaluable in our analysis of AdaBoost.We study the basic problem of inferring from a set of training examples a classification rule whose predictions are highly accurate on freshly observed test data.On first encounter, it may seem questionable whether this kind of learning should even be possible.After all, why should there be any connection between the training and test examples, and why should it be possible to generalize from a relatively small number of training examples to a potentially vast universe of test examples?Although such objections have indeed often been the subject of philosophical debate, in this chapter we will identify an idealized but realistic model of the inference problem in which this kind of learning can be proved to be entirely feasible when certain conditions are satisfied.In particular, we will see that if we can find a simple rule that fits the training data well, and if the training set is not too small, then this rule will in fact generalize well, providing accurate predictions on previously unseen test examples.This is the basis of the approach presented in this chapter, and we will often use the general analysis on which it is founded to guide us in understanding how, why, and when learning is possible.We also outline in this chapter a mathematical framework for studying machine learning, one in which a precise formulation of the boosting problem can be clearly and naturally expressed.Note that, unlike the rest of the book, this chapter omits nearly all of the proofs of the main results since these have largely all appeared in various texts and articles.
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
Cited by
Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings
Akgun, S., & Greenhow, C. (2022) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-021-00096-7 · Cited by 1,473
Norouzzadeh, M. S., Nguyen, A., Kosmala, M., Swanson, A., Palmer, M. S., Packer, C., & Clune, J. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1719367115 · Cited by 1,230
Machine Learning methods for Quantitative Radiomic Biomarkers
Parmar, C., Grossmann, P., Bussink, J., Lambin, P., & Aerts, H. J. W. L. (2015) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep13087 · Cited by 1,019
Machine Learning Testing: Survey, Landscapes and Horizons
Zhang, J. M., Harman, M., Ma, L., & Liu, Y. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2019.2962027 · Cited by 897
IoT, Big Data, and Artificial Intelligence in Agriculture and Food Industry
Misra, N. N., Dixit, Y., Al-Mallahi, A., Bhullar, M. S., Upadhyay, R., & Martynenko, A. (2022) · IEEE Internet of Things Journal · doi:10.1109/jiot.2020.2998584 · Cited by 890
Metadata
- Venue
- Boosting
- Publisher
- The MIT Press
- Published
- 2012-05-18
- Pages
- 23-52
- OpenAlex
- W2540093921
- Cited by
- 1,074
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 84.60
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Foundations of Machine Learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7551/mitpress/8291.003.0006
- The paper
- Foundations of Machine Learning. (2012). Boosting. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8291.003.0006
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.