Tree-Based Models vs. Deep Learning Models for Tabular Data: A Comprehensive Investigation
The performance of machine learning models on tabular data is an important research topic in the field of artificial intelligence. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in comparing the effectiveness of deep learning models and tree-based models on typical tabular data. A new research paper, "Comparing deep learning and tree-based models on typical tabular data," sheds light on this issue and provides a critical analysis of the related work in this area. In this article, we will discuss the key findings of this research paper and explore why tree-based models continue to outperform deep learning models on tabular data. We will also highlight the implications of these findings for future research in this field
The research paper is aimed at exploring why tree-based models perform better than deep learning models on typical tabular data. The study provides a critical analysis of the related work in this area and presents evidence to support the statement that tree-based models are still superior to deep learning models on tabular data. To establish a standard for evaluating the performance of various machine learning models, the authors conducted a comprehensive benchmark study of 45 datasets. The benchmark datasets were selected based on specific criteria[heterogeneous columns, not high dimensional, not deterministic, and others] to ensure that they were representative of real-world tabular datasets.
Moreover, the research paper extensively analyses various machine learning models, including deep learning models and tree-based models. The study carried out a comprehensive investigation by exploring and evaluating the performance of multiple models encompassing both tree-based and deep learning models, in contrast to a single model approach. The authors analyze the performance of these models on the benchmark datasets and provide a detailed comparison of their results—ensuring that samples are truly representative of their populations, in order to produce accurate and reliable results.
The paper delves into the inductive biases of decision trees that make them well-suited for tabular data and how they differ from the inductive biases of neural networks. The authors apply various transformations to tabular datasets to highlight the different inductive biases. For example, they smooth the output of each train set with a Gaussian kernel smoother to prevent models from learning irregular patterns of the target function. They also remove uninformative features to test the robustness of different models. They find that tree-based models are better able to learn irregular patterns, while neural networks struggle to fit them. They also find that MLPs are less robust to uninformative features than other models due to their rotational invariance.
领英推荐
The study also acknowledges several open questions for future research, such as exploring other inductive biases of tree-based models, extending the benchmarks to different settings, evaluating probabilistic predictions, and studying how both models cope with missing data or high-cardinality categorical features. Additionally, future research could investigate the benefits of deep learning models over tree-based models, such as studying the usefulness of embeddings learned by neural networks for downstream tasks.
In conclusion, the research paper provides a comprehensive investigation of the performance of machine learning models on tabular data, with a focus on comparing deep learning and tree-based models. It presents evidence that tree-based models outperform deep learning models in this context and offers insights into why this may be the case. The paper is well-written, transparent, and includes links to code and datasets, making it a valuable resource for the machine learning community. Overall, the paper makes a significant contribution to the field and provides a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating machine learning models on tabular data.