4.3 Article

TPOT-NN: augmenting tree-based automated machine learning with neural network estimators

期刊

GENETIC PROGRAMMING AND EVOLVABLE MACHINES
卷 22, 期 2, 页码 207-227

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10710-021-09401-z

关键词

Automated machine learning; Genetic programming; Evolutionary algorithms; Artificial neural networks; Pareto optimization

资金

  1. US National Institutes of Health [R01-LM010098, R01-LM012601, R01-AI116794, UL1-TR001878, UC4-DK112217, T32-ES019851, P30-ES013508]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AutoML and ANNs have revolutionized artificial intelligence with high-performing models, and TPOT-NN is an effective tool that can achieve greater classification accuracy than standard AutoML on some datasets. Further guidance and research are needed for the integration of AutoML and ANNs.
Automated machine learning (AutoML) and artificial neural networks (ANNs) have revolutionized the field of artificial intelligence by yielding incredibly high-performing models to solve a myriad of inductive learning tasks. In spite of their successes, little guidance exists on when to use one versus the other. Furthermore, relatively few tools exist that allow the integration of both AutoML and ANNs in the same analysis to yield results combining both of their strengths. Here, we present TPOT-NN-a new extension to the tree-based AutoML software TPOT-and use it to explore the behavior of automated machine learning augmented with neural network estimators (AutoML+NN), particularly when compared to non-NN AutoML in the context of simple binary classification on a number of public benchmark datasets. Our observations suggest that TPOT-NN is an effective tool that achieves greater classification accuracy than standard tree-based AutoML on some datasets, with no loss in accuracy on others. We also provide preliminary guidelines for performing AutoML+NN analyses, and recommend possible future directions for AutoML+NN methods research, especially in the context of TPOT.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据