MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391719686 · doi:10.1016/j.cor.2024.106579

An improved column-generation-based matheuristic for learning classification trees

2024· article· en· W4391719686 on OpenAlexaff
Krunal Kishor Patel, Guy Desaulniers, Andrea Lodi

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers & Operations Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision AnalysisPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColumn generationScalabilityComputer scienceHeuristicDecision treeMachine learningColumn (typography)Artificial intelligenceInteger programmingMathematical optimizationRelaxation (psychology)Multiclass classificationMathematicsAlgorithmSupport vector machineDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decision trees are highly interpretable models for solving classification problems in machine learning (ML). The standard ML algorithms for training decision trees are fast but generate suboptimal trees in terms of accuracy. Other discrete optimization models in the literature address the optimality problem but only work well on relatively small datasets. Firat et al. (2020) proposed a column-generation-based heuristic approach for learning decision trees. This approach improves scalability and can work with large datasets. In this paper, we describe improvements to this column generation approach. First, we modify the subproblem model to significantly reduce the number of subproblems in multiclass classification instances. Next, we show that the data-dependent constraints in the master problem are implied, and use them as cutting planes. Furthermore, we describe a separation model to generate data points for which the linear programming relaxation solution violates their corresponding constraints. We conclude by presenting computational results that show that these modifications result in better scalability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueComputers & Operations ResearchSame topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207