Random Forest Calibration

Mohammad Hossein Shaker, Eyke Hüllermeier
1/28/2025
cs.LG

No official code found. Best implementation: mhshaker/RFC (0 stars, last commit 2025-03-12).

Abstract

The Random Forest (RF) classifier is often claimed to be relatively well calibrated when compared with other machine learning methods. Moreover, the existing literature suggests that traditional calibration methods, such as isotonic regression, do not substantially enhance the calibration of RF probability estimates unless supplied with extensive calibration data sets, which can represent a significant obstacle in cases of limited data availability. Nevertheless, there seems to be no comprehensive study validating such claims and systematically comparing state-of-the-art calibration methods specifically for RF. To close this gap, we investigate a broad spectrum of calibration methods tailored to or at least applicable to RF, ranging from scaling techniques to more advanced algorithms. Our results based on synthetic as well as real-world data unravel the intricacies of RF probability estimates, scrutinize the impacts of hyper-parameters, compare calibration methods in a systematic way. We show that a well-optimized RF performs as well as or better than leading calibration approaches.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations(1)

mhshaker/RFCCommunity76%

Random Forest Calibration

00Python, Jupyter NotebookMay 17, 20241 years ago
calibrationmachine-learningrandom-forest

Cite this paper

@article{shaker2025random,
  title  = {Random Forest Calibration},
  author = {Mohammad Hossein Shaker and Eyke Hüllermeier},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2501.16756},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.16756v1}
}

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/2501.16756.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2501.16756)

Discussion