Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Ensembling over Classifiers: a Bias-Variance Perspective

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2206.10566 v1 pith:TVGQWZ6Q submitted 2022-06-21 stat.ML cs.LG

classification stat.MLcs.LG
keywords biasensemblesensemblingbias-varianceclassifiersreductionvarianceclassification
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Ensembles are a straightforward, remarkably effective method for improving the accuracy,calibration, and robustness of models on classification tasks; yet, the reasons that underlie their success remain an active area of research. We build upon the extension to the bias-variance decomposition by Pfau (2013) in order to gain crucial insights into the behavior of ensembles of classifiers. Introducing a dual reparameterization of the bias-variance tradeoff, we first derive generalized laws of total expectation and variance for nonsymmetric losses typical of classification tasks. Comparing conditional and bootstrap bias/variance estimates, we then show that conditional estimates necessarily incur an irreducible error. Next, we show that ensembling in dual space reduces the variance and leaves the bias unchanged, whereas standard ensembling can arbitrarily affect the bias. Empirically, standard ensembling reducesthe bias, leading us to hypothesize that ensembles of classifiers may perform well in part because of this unexpected reduction.We conclude by an empirical analysis of recent deep learning methods that ensemble over hyperparameters, revealing that these techniques indeed favor bias reduction. This suggests that, contrary to classical wisdom, targeting bias reduction may be a promising direction for classifier ensembles.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Position: Uncertainty Quantification Needs Reassessment for Large-language Model Agents

    cs.LG 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A position paper arguing that aleatoric/epistemic uncertainty splits fail for LLM agents and proposing underspecification, interaction, and output-based uncertainty research.

Pith tools