Paper detail

When is the majority-vote classifier beneficial?

In his seminal work, Schapire (1990) proved that weak classifiers could be improved to achieve arbitrarily high accuracy, but he never implied that a simple majority-vote mechanism could always do the trick. By comparing the asymptotic misclassification error of the majority-vote classifier with the average individual error, we discover an interesting phase-transition phenomenon. For binary classification with equal prior probabilities, our result implies that, for the majority-vote mechanism to work, the collection of weak classifiers must meet the minimum requirement of having an average true positive rate of at least 50% and an average false positive rate of at most 50%.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Authors

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.