Among various optimization algorithms, ADAM can achieve outstanding performance and has been widely used in model learning. ADAM has the advantages of fast convergence with both momentum and adaptive learning rate. For deep neural network learning problems, since their objective functions are nonconvex, ADAM can also get stuck in local optima easily. To resolve such a problem, the genetic evolutionary ADAM (GADAM) algorithm, which combines the ADAM and genetic algorithm, was introduced in recent years. To further maximize the advantages of the GADAM model, we propose to implement the boosting strategy for unit model training in GADAM. In this paper, we introduce a novel optimization algorithm, namely Boosting based GADAM (BGADAM). We will show that after adding the boosting strategy to the GADAM model, it can help unit models jump out the local optima and converge to better solutions.
: Boosting was proposed by @cite_8 . Given a training dataset containing @math training examples, a batch of @math training examples is generated by random sampling with replacement. We can generate @math training sets from the same original training data by applying the sampling @math times @cite_20 , which will be used to train @math different base models respectively in boosting.
@cite_20 @cite_8
2024046085 2103504567 1975846642 1605688901
Boosting is one of the most important recent developments in classification methodology. Boosting works by sequentially applying a classification algorithm to reweighted versions of the training data and then taking a weighted majority vote of the sequence of classifiers thus produced. For many classification algorithms, this simple strategy results in dramatic improvements in performance. We show that this seemingly mysterious phenomenon can be understood in terms of well-known statistical principles, namely additive modeling and maximum likelihood. For the two-class problem, boosting can be viewed as an approximation to additive modeling on the logistic scale using maximum Bernoulli likelihood as a criterion. We develop more direct approximations and show that they exhibit nearly identical results to boosting. Direct multiclass generalizations based on multinomial likelihood are derived that exhibit performance comparable to other recently proposed multiclass generalizations of boosting in most situations, and far superior in some. We suggest a minor modification to boosting that can reduce computation, often by factors of 10 to 50. Finally, we apply these insights to produce an alternative formulation of boosting decision trees. This approach, based on best-first truncated tree induction, often leads to better performance, and can provide interpretable descriptions of the aggregate decision rule. It is also much faster computationally, making it more suitable to large-scale data mining applications. Boosting algorithms and successful applications thereof abound for classification and regression learning problems, but not for unsupervised learning. We propose a sequential approach to adding features to a random field model by training them to improve classification performance between the data and an equal-sized sample of "negative examples" generated from the model's current estimate of the data density. Training in each boosting round proceeds in three stages: first we sample negative examples from the model's current Boltzmann distribution. Next, a feature is trained to improve classification performance between data and negative examples. Finally, a coefficient is learned which determines the importance of this feature relative to ones already in the pool. Negative examples only need to be generated once to learn each new feature. The validity of the approach is demonstrated on binary digits and continuous synthetic data. One of the surprising recurring phenomena observed in experiments with boosting is that the test error of the generated classifier usually does not increase as its size becomes very large, and often is observed to decrease even after the training error reaches zero. In this paper, we show that this phenomenon is related to the distribution of margins of the training examples with respect to the generated voting classification rule, where the margin of an example is simply the difference between the number of correct votes and the maximum number of votes received by any incorrect label. We show that techniques used in the analysis of Vapnik's support vector classifiers and of neural networks with small weights can be applied to voting methods to relate the margin distribution to the test error. We also show theoretically and experimentally that boosting is especially effective at increasing the margins of the training examples. Finally, we compare our explanation to those based on the bias-variance decomposition. Bagging and boosting are methods that generate a diverse ensemble of classifiers by manipulating the training data given to a “base” learning algorithm. Breiman has pointed out that they rely for their effectiveness on the instability of the base learning algorithm. An alternative approach to generating an ensemble is to randomize the internal decisions made by the base algorithm. This general approach has been studied previously by Ali and Pazzani and by Dietterich and Kong. This paper compares the effectiveness of randomization, bagging, and boosting for improving the performance of the decision-tree algorithm C4.5. The experiments show that in situations with little or no classification noise, randomization is competitive with (and perhaps slightly superior to) bagging but not as accurate as boosting. In situations with substantial classification noise, bagging is much better than boosting, and sometimes better than randomization.