Co-training by Committee: A New Semi-supervised Learning Framework

For many data mining applications, it is necessary to develop algorithms that use unlabeled data to improve the accuracy of the supervised learning. Co-Training is a popular semi-supervised learning algorithm. It assumes that each example is represented by two or more redundantly sufficient sets of features (views) and these views are independent given the class. However, these assumptions are not satisfied in many real-world application domains. Therefore, we present a framework called co-training by committee (CoBC), in which a set of diverse classifiers are used to learn each other. The framework is a simple, general single-view semi-supervised learner that can use any ensemble learner to build diverse committees. Experimental studies on CoBC using bagging, AdaBoost and the random subspace method (RSM) as ensemble learners demonstrate that error diversity among classifiers leads to an effective co-training that requires neither redundant and independent views nor different learning algorithms.

[1]  Avrim Blum,et al.  The Bottleneck , 2021, Monopsony Capitalism.

[2]  Zhi-Hua Zhou,et al.  Tri-training: exploiting unlabeled data using three classifiers , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[3]  Xin Yao,et al.  Diversity creation methods: a survey and categorisation , 2004, Inf. Fusion.

[4]  Yan Zhou,et al.  Democratic co-learning , 2004, 16th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence.

[5]  Thomas G. Dietterich,et al.  Pruning Adaptive Boosting , 1997, ICML.

[6]  J. Ross Quinlan,et al.  C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning , 1992 .

[7]  Sebastian Thrun,et al.  Text Classification from Labeled and Unlabeled Documents using EM , 2000, Machine Learning.

[8]  Yoav Freund,et al.  Experiments with a New Boosting Algorithm , 1996, ICML.

[9]  Günther Palm,et al.  Semi-supervised Learning of Tree-Structured RBF Networks Using Co-training , 2008, ICANN.

[10]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  Data mining: practical machine learning tools and techniques with Java implementations , 2002, SGMD.

[11]  Ian Witten,et al.  Data Mining , 2000 .

[12]  Paul A. Viola,et al.  Unsupervised improvement of visual detectors using cotraining , 2003, Proceedings Ninth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision.

[13]  Catherine Blake,et al.  UCI Repository of machine learning databases , 1998 .

[14]  H. Sebastian Seung,et al.  Selective Sampling Using the Query by Committee Algorithm , 1997, Machine Learning.

[15]  Irena Koprinska,et al.  Co-training using RBF Nets and Different Feature Splits , 2006, The 2006 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Network Proceedings.

[16]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Bagging Predictors , 1996, Machine Learning.

[17]  Thomas G. Dietterich An Experimental Comparison of Three Methods for Constructing Ensembles of Decision Trees: Bagging, Boosting, and Randomization , 2000, Machine Learning.

[18]  Tin Kam Ho,et al.  The Random Subspace Method for Constructing Decision Forests , 1998, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[19]  Rayid Ghani,et al.  Analyzing the effectiveness and applicability of co-training , 2000, CIKM '00.

[20]  D. Rubin,et al.  Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM - algorithm plus discussions on the paper , 1977 .

[21]  Aiko M. Hormann,et al.  Programs for Machine Learning. Part I , 1962, Inf. Control..

[22]  Yan Zhou,et al.  Enhancing Supervised Learning with Unlabeled Data , 2000, ICML.

[23]  Stan Matwin,et al.  Email classification with co-training , 2011, CASCON.