1 / 20

Stacked Generalization an overview of the paper by David H. Wolpert

Stacked Generalization an overview of the paper by David H. Wolpert. Jim Ries JimR@acm.org CECS 477 : Neural Networks February 2, 2000. Introduction. Published in “Neural Networks” 1992 David H. Wolpert - Postdoctoral Fellow Sante Fe Institute. Previously Los Alamos. Degrees in Physics.

niel
Download Presentation

Stacked Generalization an overview of the paper by David H. Wolpert

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Stacked Generalizationan overview of the paper by David H. Wolpert Jim Ries JimR@acm.org CECS 477 : Neural Networks February 2, 2000

  2. Introduction • Published in “Neural Networks” 1992 • David H. Wolpert - Postdoctoral Fellow Sante Fe Institute. Previously Los Alamos. Degrees in Physics.

  3. Introduction (cont.) • A “generalizer” is an algorithm which guesses a parent function based on a learning set read from the parent function. • Neural networks are a subset of generalizers. • Other generalizers exist, such as Bayesian classifiers.

  4. Introduction (cont.) • “Stack generalization” is a mechanism for minimizing the error rate of one or more generalizers. • Can be used to combine generalizers that have been taught part of the learning set. • More sophisticated version of cross-validation (testing generalizers against previously unseen training data).

  5. Introduction (cont.) • General Idea: • Partition learning set. • Train on one part. • Observe behavior on the other part of the partition. • Correct for biases.

  6. Topics of Discussion • Existing “winner take all” alternatives. • Detailed description of stacked generalization. • Discuss an experiment using stacked generalization. • Variations and Extensions. • Concluding Thoughts

  7. Existing “Winner-Takes-All” Strategies • Cross-validation & generalized cross-validation. • Bootstrapping. • Given a set of candidate generalizers {Gj}, these techniques choose the best G{Gj} s.t. estimated errors are minimized.

  8. Stacked Generalization • Generalizer definition • maps learning set {xk Rn, yk R} together with a question q  Rn into a guess  R. • If the generalizer returns the correct yi when q is one of the xi, then it reproduces the learning set.

  9. Stacked Generalization (cont.) • Split learning set  Rn+1 into 2 (disjoint) sets, i1 and i2 called partition sets. • Cross-validation takes a set of candidate generalizers {Gj} trained from i1 and chooses the candidate with the least error when fed the test partition set i2.

  10. Stacked Generalization (cont.) • Stacked Generalization combines all of the generalizers rather than choosing a “best” one. • Case of 1 generalizer is still interesting in that stacked generalization is essentially a guard against over-fitting.

  11. Stacked Generalization (cont.) • Define Rn+1 in which  lives as “level 0”, and any generalizer of  as a “level 0” generalizer. • Look at a set of k numbers determined by the N {Gj} generalizers working together within each partition.

  12. Stacked Generalization (cont.) • Consider each set of k as the input part of a point in Rk+1 (“level 1” space). • Generalize from  by operating a generalizer in the level 1 space. • Thus, we have a “stack” of generalizers. • More than 2 level stacks are possible.

  13. Stacked Generalization (cont.) • Problem: What generalizer(s) to use at each level? (unanswered)

  14. Stacked Generalization (cont.) Multiple Generalizers: 1) Creating L’ Level 1/ Learning set L’. Contains r elements, one for each partition in the level 0 partition set. L’ output L’ input Level 0/ Learning set . Partition set ij. Generalizers {Gp}. G1(ij; in(i2)) G2(ij; in(i2)) ... out(i2))

  15. L’ outputs L’ inputs Stacked Generalization (cont.) Multiple Generalizers: 2) Guessing Final guess Level 1/ Learning set L’. Generalizer G’. Question q’.. G’(L’;q’) Q’, the level 1 question Level 0/ Learning set . Generalizers {Gp}. Question q. G1(; q) G2(; q) ...

  16. Experiment • NETtalk “reading aloud” problem. • 7 letters as input. • Output is an English phoneme that a human would utter if reading aloud. • Several separate generalizers combined.

  17. Experiment (cont.) • Best level 0 generalizer got 69% correct. • Stacked generalization got 88% correct.

  18. Variations and Extensions • Consider level 1 output not as a guess but as an estimate of the error of a guess. (can be tweaked by using a constant to denote what percentage of error to be considered) • Consider the entire stacked generalization as a generalization which can be stacked.

  19. Concluding Thoughts • Where is the evidence that considering all of  when training is not as good as considering part of  and then adding another layer using the remaining ? • How does stacked generalization compare to applying heuristics such as regularization or early stopping to avoid over-fitting?

  20. Questions?

More Related