Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

David W. Opitz

dblp:95/1531 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
9ranked-venue papers
9as first author
0since 2021 · last 1999
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 8 · 8 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
4 papers
Representation and self-supervised learning · 33% Deep learning architectures and training · 31% Learning theory · 16%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training › hybrid neural network
knowledge-based neural networks
0.021994
Using Genetic Search to Refine Knowledge-based Neural Networks · ICML 1994
Heuristically Expanding Knowledge-Based Neural Networks · IJCAI 1993
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning
dimensionality reduction
0.011997
The Effective Size of a Neural Network: A Principal Component Approach · ICML 1997
Machine learning › Learning theory › neural network theory
network capacity
0.011997
The Effective Size of a Neural Network: A Principal Component Approach · ICML 1997
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning › dimensionality reduction
principal component analysis
0.011997
The Effective Size of a Neural Network: A Principal Component Approach · ICML 1997
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods › ensemble learning
neural network ensemble
0.011995
Generating Accurate and Diverse Members of a Neural-Network Ensemble · NIPS 1995
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
evolutionary computation
0.011994
Using Genetic Search to Refine Knowledge-based Neural Networks · ICML 1994
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › evolutionary computation
genetic algorithms
0.011994
Using Genetic Search to Refine Knowledge-based Neural Networks · ICML 1994

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

principal component analysis · 0.0neural network training · 0.0ensemble methods · 0.0knowledge-based neural networks · 0.0genetic search · 0.0neural-symbolic integration · 0.0heuristic search · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1999 Popular Ensemble Methods: An Empirical Study
abstract
An ensemble consists of a set of individually trained classifiers (such as neural networks or decision trees) whose predictions are combined when classifying novel instances. Previous research has shown that an ensemble is often more accurate than any of the single classifiers in the ensemble. Bagging (Breiman, 1996c) and Boosting (Freund & Shapire, 1996; Shapire, 1990) are two relatively new but popular methods for producing ensembles. In this paper we evaluate these methods on 23 data sets using both neural networks and decision trees as our classification algorithm. Our results clearly indicate a number of conclusions. First, while Bagging is almost always more accurate than a single classifier, it is sometimes much less accurate than Boosting. On the other hand, Boosting can create ensembles that are less accurate than a single classifier -- especially when using neural networks. Analysis indicates that the performance of the Boosting methods is dependent on the characteristics of the data set being examined. In fact, further results show that Boosting ensembles may overfit noisy data sets, thus decreasing its performance. Finally, consistent with previous studies, our work suggests that most of the gain in an ensemble's performance comes in the first few classifiers combined; however, relatively large gains can be seen up to 25 classifiers when Boosting decision trees.
David W. Opitz, Richard Maclin
J. Artif. Intell. Res.1
1997 The Effective Size of a Neural Network: A Principal Component Approach
David W. Opitz
ICML1
1997 Connectionist Theory Refinement: Genetically Searching the Space of Network Topologies
abstract
An algorithm that learns from a set of examples should ideally be able to exploit the available resources of (a) abundant computing power and (b) domain-specific knowledge to improve its ability to generalize. Connectionist theory-refinement systems, which use background knowledge to select a neural network's topology and initial weights, have proven to be effective at exploiting domain-specific knowledge; however, most do not exploit available computing power. This weakness occurs because they lack the ability to refine the topology of the neural networks they produce, thereby limiting generalization, especially when given impoverished domain theories. We present the REGENT algorithm which uses (a) domain-specific knowledge to help create an initial population of knowledge-based neural networks and (b) genetic operators of crossover and mutation (specifically designed for knowledge-based networks) to continually search for better network topologies. Experiments on three real-world domains indicate that our new algorithm is able to significantly increase generalization compared to a standard connectionist theory-refinement system, as well as our previous algorithm for growing knowledge-based networks.
David W. Opitz, Jude W. Shavlik
J. Artif. Intell. Res.1
1996 Actively Searching for an Effective Neural Network Ensemble
abstract
A neural network NN ensemble is a very successful technique where the outputs of a set of separately trained NNs are combined to form one unified prediction. An effective ensemble should consist of a set of networks that are not only highly correct, but ones that make their errors on different parts of the input space as well; however, most existing techniques only indirectly address the problem of creating such a set. We present an algorithm called ADDEMUP that uses genetic algorithms to search explicitly for a highly diverse set of accurate trained networks. ADDEMUP works by first creating an initial population, then uses genetic operators to create new networks continually, keeping the set of networks that are highly accurate while disagreeing with each other as much as possible. Experiments on four real-world domains show that ADDEMUP is able to generate a set of trained networks that is more accurate than several existing ensemble approaches. Experiments also show ADDEMUP is able to incorporate prior knowledge effectively, if available, to improve the quality of its ensemble.
David W. Opitz, Jude W. Shavlik
Connect. Sci.1
1995 Generating Accurate and Diverse Members of a Neural-Network Ensemble
David W. Opitz, Jude W. Shavlik
NIPS1
1995 Dynamically adding symbolically meaningful nodes to knowledge-based neural networks
David W. Opitz, Jude W. Shavlik
Knowl. Based Syst.1
1994 Using Genetic Search to Refine Knowledge-based Neural Networks
David W. Opitz, Jude W. Shavlik
ICML1
1993 Heuristically Expanding Knowledge-Based Neural Networks
David W. Opitz, Jude W. Shavlik
IJCAI1
1991 A Study of Single Bit Spin Waiting Alternatives
David W. Opitz
ICPP (1)1