MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408791657 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3554093

Understanding the Role of Diversity in Ensemble-Based AutoML Methods for Classification Tasks

2025· article· en· W4408791657 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Salomey Osei, Antonio D. Masegosa

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónEusko JaurlaritzaEuropean Commission
KeywordsComputer scienceDiversity (politics)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ensemble-based Automated Machine Learning (AutoML) methods have gained prominence for their ability to combine diverse machine learning models, achieving superior generalization performance. Despite their empirical success, the underlying mechanisms driving this performance, particularly the role of model diversity, are not yet adequately understood. This study uses novel theoretical frameworks related to the role of diversity in ensembles, which were recently proposed, to shed light on this issue. In this work, we focus on AutoML methods for classification tasks. We use AUTO-SKLEARN (a widely used AutoML ensemble-based method) as a basis. More specifically, we examine how individual model diversity and performance evolves across the four key phases of AUTO-SKLEARN (base-learners, meta-learning, Bayesian Optimization (BO), and Caruana Ensemble). We also examine how they contribute to the diversity and performance of the final ensemble produced by the AutoML method. Using datasets from the AutoML benchmark, we empirically validate these insights by analyzing error rates and diversity measures across the mentioned phases. Our findings highlight the trade-off between individual model accuracy and ensemble diversity, showing that phases like BO improve the mean error rate of classifiers by nearly 50% percent but reduce their mean diversity by 20%. However, the Caruana phase increases the diversity by a 50% compared to the BO phase, allowing better generalization despite the higher mean error rate of the selected individual models (48% higher than BO). This work provides theoretical and empirical evidence that diversity is critical to the success of ensemble-based AutoML methods and a deeper understanding of diversity’s impact on generalization performance and the role of the different AutoML phases. These findings can contribute to advance the development of more robust and theoretically grounded AutoML frameworks.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207