Сравнение методов

	Бэггинг (Бутстрэп-агрегирование)	Бустинг	Чрезвычайно случайные деревья
Область	Машинное обучение	Машинное обучение	Машинное обучение
Семейство	Machine learning	Machine learning	Machine learning
Год появления	1996	1990–1997	2006
Автор метода	Breiman, L.	Schapire, R. E.; Freund, Y.	Geurts, P.; Ernst, D.; Wehenkel, L.
Тип	Ensemble meta-algorithm (variance reduction via bootstrap aggregation)	Sequential ensemble (iterative reweighting)	Ensemble (extremely randomized decision trees)
Основополагающий источник	Breiman, L. (1996). Bagging Predictors. Machine Learning, 24(2), 123–140.	Freund, Y. & Schapire, R. E. (1997). A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an application to boosting. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 55(1), 119–139.	Geurts, P., Ernst, D. & Wehenkel, L. (2006). Extremely randomized trees. Machine Learning, 63(1), 3–42.
Другие названия	Bootstrap Aggregating, bootstrap aggregation, bagged ensemble, bagged predictor	AdaBoost, gradient boosting, iterative reweighting ensemble, sequential ensemble	Extremely Randomized Trees, ExtraTreesClassifier, ExtraTreesRegressor, ET
Связанные	5	6	5
Сводка	Bagging, short for Bootstrap Aggregating, is an ensemble meta-algorithm introduced by Leo Breiman in 1996 that trains multiple copies of a base learner on independently drawn bootstrap samples of the training data and combines their predictions — by averaging for regression or majority vote for classification — to produce a final predictor with substantially lower variance than any single base learner.	Boosting is a sequential ensemble technique that converts many simple, barely-better-than-chance learners into a single highly accurate model by repeatedly focusing training on the examples that previous learners got wrong, then combining all learners with weights proportional to their individual accuracy.	Extra Trees (Extremely Randomized Trees), introduced by Geurts, Ernst, and Wehenkel in 2006, is an ensemble of decision trees that pushes randomisation further than Random Forest. Both the candidate features and the split thresholds are chosen completely at random at each node, eliminating the greedy search over thresholds. This extra randomness reduces variance, often matches or exceeds Random Forest accuracy, and runs substantially faster at training time.