Multiclass Boosting: Simple and Intuitive Weak Learning Criteria

Nataly Brukhim, Amit Daniely, Yishay Mansour, Shay Moran
7/2/2023
cs.LG

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

We study a generalization of boosting to the multiclass setting. We introduce a weak learning condition for multiclass classification that captures the original notion of weak learnability as being "slightly better than random guessing". We give a simple and efficient boosting algorithm, that does not require realizability assumptions and its sample and oracle complexity bounds are independent of the number of classes. In addition, we utilize our new boosting technique in several theoretical applications within the context of List PAC Learning. First, we establish an equivalence to weak PAC learning. Furthermore, we present a new result on boosting for list learners, as well as provide a novel proof for the characterization of multiclass PAC learning and List PAC learning. Notably, our technique gives rise to a simplified analysis, and also implies an improved error bound for large list sizes, compared to previous results.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{brukhim2023multiclass,
  title  = {Multiclass Boosting: Simple and Intuitive Weak Learning Criteria},
  author = {Nataly Brukhim and Amit Daniely and Yishay Mansour and Shay Moran},
  year   = {2023},
  eprint = {2307.00642},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.00642v1},
  journal = {NEURIPS 2023 2023}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2307.00642.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2307.00642)

Discussion