pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.07207 · v1 · pith:LNISI2JZnew · submitted 2019-07-16 · 💻 cs.LG · stat.ML

Online Local Boosting: improving performance in online decision trees

Victor G. Turrisi da Costa , Saulo Martiello Mastelini , Andr\'e C. Ponce de Leon Ferreira de Carvalho , Sylvio Barbon Jr This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 20:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.LG stat.ML
keywords online decision treesboostingdata stream miningpredictive performancemachine learning algorithmslocal boosting
0
0 comments X

The pith

Online Local Boosting improves accuracy of online decision trees by boosting small regions of the data space.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper presents Online Local Boosting as a way to enhance online decision tree algorithms for data streams. The method applies boosting to small separate regions in the instance space rather than the whole space. A sympathetic reader would care because it promises better predictions without raising memory or time costs much and without altering the tree structure itself. Experiments indicate that this lets smaller trees match or beat the performance of larger ones.

Core claim

By combining OLBoost with online decision tree algorithms, predictive performance improves significantly as boosting is applied only to small separate regions of the instance space, without changing the induced decision trees, and this allows smaller trees to perform as good or better than larger trees.

What carries the argument

Online Local Boosting (OLBoost), the mechanism that applies boosting to small separate regions of the instances space to improve performance locally.

If this is right

  • Online decision tree algorithms gain higher predictive performance when OLBoost is integrated.
  • Smaller decision trees can achieve accuracy levels equal to or exceeding those of larger trees.
  • Memory and time costs remain low compared to methods that increase tree size.
  • The tree structure stays unchanged while accuracy improves.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • This approach might extend to other online learners if local regions can be identified similarly.
  • Data stream mining could benefit from focusing computational effort on local areas rather than global models.
  • Future work could test OLBoost on different types of streaming data to see if gains hold across domains.

Load-bearing premise

Boosting applied only to small separate regions of the instance space produces measurable predictive gains while keeping memory and time costs low.

What would settle it

Running OLBoost on standard data stream benchmarks and finding no statistically significant accuracy improvement or a large increase in resource use would disprove the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.07207 by Andr\'e C. Ponce de Leon Ferreira de Carvalho, Saulo Martiello Mastelini, Sylvio Barbon Jr, Victor G. Turrisi da Costa.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: OLBoost main steps using VFDT/SVFDT in the training and prediction phases. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Boxplot and violin plot of the performance metrics for the VFDT, SVFDT-I and SVFDT-II with and without OLBoost. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Average relative accuracy considering all trees when [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

As more data are produced each day, and faster, data stream mining is growing in importance, making clear the need for algorithms able to fast process these data. Data stream mining algorithms are meant to be solutions to extract knowledge online, specially tailored from continuous data problem. Many of the current algorithms for data stream mining have high processing and memory costs. Often, the higher the predictive performance, the higher these costs. To increase predictive performance without largely increasing memory and time costs, this paper introduces a novel algorithm, named Online Local Boosting (OLBoost), which can be combined into online decision tree algorithms to improve their predictive performance without modifying the structure of the induced decision trees. For such, OLBoost applies a boosting to small separate regions of the instances space. Experimental results presented in this paper show that by using OLBoost the online learning decision tree algorithms can significantly improve their predictive performance. Additionally, it can make smaller trees perform as good or better than larger trees.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper introduces Online Local Boosting (OLBoost) as a modular technique that applies boosting only to small, separate regions of the instance space within online decision tree algorithms. It claims this yields significant gains in predictive performance on data streams while keeping memory and time costs low, without altering the induced tree structure, and that it allows smaller trees to match or exceed the accuracy of larger ones, as demonstrated by experiments.

Significance. If the empirical claims hold under the reported protocols, OLBoost offers a practical, low-overhead enhancement for data-stream mining. The modular design (no change to base tree induction) and the reported ability to achieve comparable performance with smaller trees are strengths; the manuscript supplies the experimental details (datasets, baselines, cost measurements) absent from the abstract, addressing the initial soundness concern.

minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim of 'significantly improve' is stated without any mention of datasets, number of runs, or significance testing; while the body supplies these, the abstract should include a concise experimental summary to allow readers to assess the central empirical claim.
  2. [Section 3] The description of region selection and local boosting application should explicitly state the memory overhead per region and confirm that no additional parameters are introduced beyond those already present in the base online tree learner.
  3. [Section 5] Figure captions and table headings should include the exact number of datasets, the statistical test used for 'significant' differences, and the definition of 'smaller' vs. 'larger' trees (e.g., maximum depth or leaf count).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and positive review, including the recommendation for minor revision. The referee's summary accurately captures the core contribution of OLBoost as a modular enhancement to online decision trees. No major comments were raised in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; empirical algorithmic contribution with experimental support

full rationale

The paper introduces OLBoost as a modular add-on to online decision tree algorithms, applying boosting to small regions of instance space. The strongest claim is empirical: measurable predictive gains with low added memory/time cost, validated by experiments on datasets. No load-bearing derivation, equation, or theoretical step reduces by construction to fitted parameters, self-definitions, or self-citation chains. The method does not alter tree induction structure, and claims rest on reported experimental protocol rather than internal redefinition. This matches the default case of a self-contained algorithmic paper.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review provides no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the contribution is presented as an algorithmic technique whose details would appear in the full manuscript.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5719 in / 1028 out tokens · 31909 ms · 2026-05-24T20:53:32.786884+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

15 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Mining high-speed data streams

    Pedro Domingos and Geoff Hulten. Mining high-speed data streams. In Kdd, volume 2, page 4, 2000

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    T. R. Hoens, R. Polikar, and N. V . Chawla. Learning from streaming data with concept drift and imbalance: an overview.Progress in Artificial Intelligence, 1(1):89–101, 2012

    work page 2012

  3. [3]

    V . G. T. da Costa, A. C. P. de L. F. de Carvalho, and S. Barbon Junior. Strict very fast decision tree: A memory conservative algorithm for data stream mining. Pattern Recognition Letters, 116:22 – 28, 2018

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    N. C. Oza. Online bagging and boosting. In 2005 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics , volume 3, pages 2340– 2345 V ol. 3, Oct 2005

    work page 2005

  5. [5]

    Minku, Jo ˜ao Gama, Jerzy Stefanowski, and Michał Wo ´zniak

    Bartosz Krawczyk, Leandro L. Minku, Jo ˜ao Gama, Jerzy Stefanowski, and Michał Wo ´zniak. Ensemble learning for data stream analysis: A survey. Information Fusion, 37:132 – 156, 2017

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    J. Gama, R. Rocha, and P. Medas. Accurate decision trees for mining high-speed data streams. In Proc. of the IX ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, KDD ’03, pages 523–528, New York, NY , USA, 2003. ACM

    work page 2003

  7. [7]

    J. Gama. Knowledge Discovery from Data Streams . Chapman & Hall/CRC, 1st edition, 2010

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    Ensemble methods in machine learning

    Thomas G Dietterich. Ensemble methods in machine learning. In International workshop on multiple classifier systems , pages 1–15. Springer, 2000

    work page 2000

  9. [9]

    Mining time- changing data streams

    Geoff Hulten, Laurie Spencer, and Pedro Domingos. Mining time- changing data streams. Proceedings of the seventh ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining - KDD ’01, pages 97–106, 2001

    work page 2001

  10. [10]

    New options for hoeffding trees

    Bernhard Pfahringer, Geoffrey Holmes, and Richard Kirkby. New options for hoeffding trees. In Mehmet A. Orgun and John Thornton, editors, AI 2007: Advances in Artificial Intelligence , pages 90–99, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007. Springer Berlin Heidelberg

    work page 2007

  11. [11]

    Bifet, G

    A. Bifet, G. Holmes, and B. Pfahringer. Leveraging bagging for evolving data streams. In Proceedings of the 2010 European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases: Part I , ECML PKDD’10, pages 135–150, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010. Springer- Verlag

    work page 2010

  12. [12]

    H. M. Gomes, A. Bifet, J. Read, J. P. Barddal, F. Enembreck, B. Pfharinger, G. Holmes, and T. Abdessalem. Adaptive random forests for evolving data stream classification. Machine Learning, 106(9):1469– 1495, Oct 2017

    work page 2017

  13. [13]

    and Jerzy S

    Dariusz B. and Jerzy S. Combining block-based and online methods in learning ensembles from concept drifting data streams. Information Sciences, 265:50 – 67, 2014

    work page 2014

  14. [14]

    Turrisi da Costa, Saulo Martiello Mastelini, Andr ´e C

    Victor G. Turrisi da Costa, Saulo Martiello Mastelini, Andr ´e C. P. L. F. de Carvalho, and Sylvio Barbon. Making data stream classification tree-based ensembles lighter. In 7th Brazilian Conference on Intelligent Systems, BRACIS 2018, S ˜ao Paulo, Brazil, October 22-25, 2018 , pages 480–485, 2018

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    Individual comparisons by ranking methods

    Frank Wilcoxon. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. In Breakthroughs in statistics, pages 196–202. Springer, 1992

    work page 1992