Decision tree heuristics can fail, even in the smoothed setting
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Greedy decision tree learning heuristics are mainstays of machine learning practice, but theoretical justification for their empirical success remains elusive. In fact, it has long been known that there are simple target functions for which they fail badly (Kearns and Mansour, STOC 1996). Recent work of Brutzkus, Daniely, and Malach (COLT 2020) considered the smoothed analysis model as a possible avenue towards resolving this disconnect. Within the smoothed setting and for targets f that are k-juntas, they showed that these heuristics successfully learn f with depth-k decision tree hypotheses. They conjectured that the same guarantee holds more generally for targets that are depth-k decision trees. We provide a counterexample to this conjecture: we construct targets that are depth-k decision trees and show that even in the smoothed setting, these heuristics build trees of depth 2Omega(k) before achieving high accuracy. We also show that the guarantees of Brutzkus et al. cannot extend to the agnostic setting: there are targets that are very close to k-juntas, for which these heuristics build trees of depth 2Omega(k) before achieving high accuracy.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jul 2021.
Builds on
7 of 33 references.
References · 7
- 2017Hyperparameter Optimization: A Spectral Approachcited by 24
- 2019Top-down induction of decision trees: rigorous guarantees and inherent limitationscited by 17
- 2018Beyond the Low-Degree Algorithm: Mixtures of Subcubes and Their Applicationscited by 15
- 2019ID3 Learns Juntas for Smoothed Product Distributionscited by 13
- 2020Provable guarantees for decision tree induction: the agnostic settingcited by 6
- 2020Universal guarantees for decision tree induction via a higher-order splitting criterioncited by 6
- 2019On the Optimality of Trees Generated by ID3cited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 2; 2024: 3.
7 papers.
- 2022What Can Transformers Learn In-Context? A Case Study of Simple Function Classescited by 700
- 2023Properly Learning Decision Trees with Queries Is NP-Hardcited by 5
- 2022Popular decision tree algorithms are provably noise tolerantcited by 3
- 2023Harnessing the Power of Choices in Decision Tree Learningcited by 2
- 2024Superfast Selection for Decision Tree Algorithmscited by 0
- 2024The Role of Depth, Width, and Tree Size in Expressiveness of Deep Forestcited by 0
- 2024Discovering Data Structures: Nearest Neighbor Search and Beyondcited by 0
- 2024Discovering Data Structures: Nearest Neighbor Search and Beyond5 Nov 2024
- 2024The Role of Depth, Width, and Tree Size in Expressiveness of Deep Forest6 Jul 2024
- 2024Superfast Selection for Decision Tree Algorithms31 May 2024
- 2023Harnessing the Power of Choices in Decision Tree Learning2 Oct 2023
- 2023Properly Learning Decision Trees with Queries Is NP-Hard9 Jul 2023
- 2022What Can Transformers Learn In-Context? A Case Study of Simple Function Classes1 Aug 2022
- 2022Popular decision tree algorithms are provably noise tolerant17 Jun 2022