Random Forest Calibration
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
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.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Jan 2025.
Builds on
8 of 42 references.
References · 8
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
- 2020Uncertainty Quantification and Deep Ensemblescited by 138
- 2020Mitigating Bias in Calibration Error Estimationcited by 100
- 2021Classifier Calibration: A survey on how to assess and improve predicted class probabilitiescited by 71
- 2022Better Uncertainty Calibration via Proper Scores for Classification and Beyondcited by 65
- 2021Top-label calibration and multiclass-to-binary reductionscited by 46
- 2016Predicting the direction of stock market prices using random forestcited by 14
- 2021Should Ensemble Members Be Calibrated?cited by 11
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
3 papers.
- 2025When Active Learning Fails, Uncalibrated Out of Distribution Uncertainty Quantification Might Be the Problemcited by 1
- 2026The ACUTE Protocol: Operationalizing Language Model Activations for Better Calibration, Utility, and Trustcited by 1
- 2026Calibrated Preference Learning: The Case of Label Rankingcited by 0
- 2026The ACUTE Protocol: Operationalizing Language Model Activations for Better Calibration, Utility, and Trust5 Jun 2026
- 2026Calibrated Preference Learning: The Case of Label Ranking28 May 2026
- 2025When Active Learning Fails, Uncalibrated Out of Distribution Uncertainty Quantification Might Be the Problem21 Nov 2025