Tree-Structured Classification via Generalized Discriminant Analysis
通过广义判别分析构建树形分类器AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:文本是通用分类树方法,住房数据示例不足以证明其研究离散选择行为或所列其他方向。
通过广义判别分析构建树形分类器AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
The problem of constructing classification rules that can be represented as decision trees is considered. Each object to be classified has an associated x vector containing possibly incomplete covariate information. Tree construction is based on the information provided in a “learning sample” of objects with known class identities. The x vectors in the learning sample may have missing values as well. Procedures are proposed for each of the components of classifier construction, such as split selection, tree-size determination, treatment of missing values, and ranking of variables. The main idea is recursive application of linear discriminant analysis, with the variables at each stage being appropriately chosen according to the data and the type of splits desired. Standard statistical techniques used as basic building blocks include analysis of variance, linear and canonical discriminant analysis, and principal component analysis. A new method of tree-structured classification is obtained by assembling the pieces. This method can accommodate prior probabilities as well as unequal misclassification costs and can yield trees with univariate, linear combination, or linear combination with polar coordinate splits. The method is compared with the CART method of Breiman, Friedman, Olshen, and Stone (1984). Some of the operational differences are that the new method (a) can have multiple splits per node, (b) is nonrandomized, (c) uses a direct stopping rule, (d) handles missing values by estimation, (e) allows both ordered and unordered variables in the same linear combination split, (f) is not invariant of monotone transformations of the individual variables, and (g) is computationally faster. Simulation experiments suggest that the two methods have comparable classification accuracy. The Boston housing data are analyzed in a classification context for illustration.