You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
Random forests are a type of ensemble method which makes predictions by combining the results of several independent trees. However, the theory of random forests has long been outpaced by their application. In this paper, we propose a novel random forests algorithm based on cooperative game theory. Banzhaf power index is employed to evaluate the power of each feature by traversing possible feature coalitions. Unlike the previously used information gain rate of information theory, which simply chooses the most informative feature, the Banzhaf power index can be considered as a metric of the importance of each feature on the dependency among a group of features. More importantly, we have proved the consistency of the proposed algorithm, named Banzhaf random forests (BRF). This theoretical analysis takes a step towards narrowing the gap between the theory and practice of random forests for classification problems. Experiments on several UCI benchmark data sets show that BRF is competitive with state-of-the-art classifiers and dramatically outperforms previous consistent random forests. Particularly, it is much more efficient than previous consistent random forests.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: Bagging and boosting are methods that generate a diverse ensemble of classifiers by manipulating the training data given to a “base” learning algorithm. Breiman has pointed out that they rely for their effectiveness on the instability of the base learning algorithm. An alternative approach to generating an ensemble is to randomize the internal decisions made by the base algorithm. This general approach has been studied previously by Ali and Pazzani and by Dietterich and Kong. This paper compares the effectiveness of randomization, bagging, and boosting for improving the performance of the decision-tree algorithm C4.5. The experiments show that in situations with little or no classification noise, randomization is competitive with (and perhaps slightly superior to) bagging but not as accurate as boosting. In situations with substantial classification noise, bagging is much better than boosting, and sometimes better than randomization.

[2]: A new classification and regression tool, Random Forest, is introduced and investigated for predicting a compound's quantitative or categorical biological activity based on a quantitative description of the compound's molecular structure. Random Forest is an ensemble of unpruned classification or regression trees created by using bootstrap samples of the training data and random feature selection in tree induction. Prediction is made by aggregating (majority vote or averaging) the predictions of the ensemble. We built predictive models for six cheminformatics data sets. Our analysis demonstrates that Random Forest is a powerful tool capable of delivering performance that is among the most accurate methods to date. We also present three additional features of Random Forest: built-in performance assessment, a measure of relative importance of descriptors, and a measure of compound similarity that is weighted by the relative importance of descriptors. It is the combination of relatively high prediction accu...

[3]: The task of modeling the distribution of a large number of tree species under future climate scenarios presents unique challenges. First, the model must be robust enough to handle climate data outside the current range without producing unacceptable instability in the output. In addition, the technique should have automatic search mechanisms built in to select the most appropriate values for input model parameters for each species so that minimal effort is required when these parameters are fine-tuned for individual tree species. We evaluated four statistical models—Regression Tree Analysis (RTA), Bagging Trees (BT), Random Forests (RF), and Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines (MARS)—for predictive vegetation mapping under current and future climate scenarios according to the Canadian Climate Centre global circulation model. To test, we applied these techniques to four tree species common in the eastern United States: loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), and white oak (Quercus alba). When the four techniques were assessed with Kappa and fuzzy Kappa statistics, RF and BT were superior in reproducing current importance value (a measure of basal area in addition to abundance) distributions for the four tree species, as derived from approximately 100,000 USDA Forest Service’s Forest Inventory and Analysis plots. Future estimates of suitable habitat after climate change were visually more reasonable with BT and RF, with slightly better performance by RF as assessed by Kappa statistics, correlation estimates, and spatial distribution of importance values. Although RTA did not perform as well as BT and RF, it provided interpretive models for species whose distributions were captured well by our current set of predictors. MARS was adequate for predicting current distributions but unacceptable for future climate. We consider RTA, BT, and RF modeling approaches, especially when used together to take advantage of their individual strengths, to be robust for predictive mapping and recommend their inclusion in the ecological toolbox.

[4]: 

[5]: We explore a new approach to shape recognition based on a virtually infinite family of binary features (queries) of the image data, designed to accommodate prior information about shape invariance and regularity. Each query corresponds to a spatial arrangement of several local topographic codes (or tags), which are in themselves too primitive and common to be informative about shape. All the discriminating power derives from relative angles and distances among the tags. The important attributes of the queries are a natural partial ordering corresponding to increasing structure and complexity; semi-invariance, meaning that most shapes of a given class will answer the same way to two queries that are successive in the ordering; and stability, since the queries are not based on distinguished points and substructures. No classifier based on the full feature set can be evaluated, and it is impossible to determine a priori which arrangements are informative. Our approach is to select informative features and build tree classifiers at the same time by inductive learning. In effect, each tree provides an approximation to the full posterior where the features chosen depend on the branch that is traversed. Due to the number and nature of the queries, standard decision tree construction based on a fixed-length feature vector is not feasible. Instead we entertain only a small random sample of queries at each node, constrain their complexity to increase with tree depth, and grow multiple trees. The terminal nodes are labeled by estimates of the corresponding posterior distribution over shape classes. An image is classified by sending it down every tree and aggregating the resulting distributions. The method is applied to classifying handwritten digits and synthetic linear and nonlinear deformations of three hundred L AT E X symbols. Stateof-the-art error rates are achieved on the National Institute of Standards and Technology database of digits. The principal goal of the experiments on L AT E X symbols is to analyze invariance, generalization error and related issues, and a comparison with artificial neural networks methods is presented in this context.

[6]: This practical and easy-to-follow text explores the theoretical underpinnings of decision forests, organizing the vast existing literature on the field within a new, general-purpose forest model. Topics and features: with a foreword by Prof. Y. Amit and Prof. D. Geman, recounting their participation in the development of decision forests; introduces a flexible decision forest model, capable of addressing a large and diverse set of image and video analysis tasks; investigates both the theoretical foundations and the practical implementation of decision forests; discusses the use of decision forests for such tasks as classification, regression, density estimation, manifold learning, active learning and semi-supervised classification; includes exercises and experiments throughout the text, with solutions, slides, demo videos and other supplementary material provided at an associated website; provides a free, user-friendly software library, enabling the reader to experiment with forests in a hands-on manner.

[7]: 

[8]: Classification procedures are some of the most widely used statistical methods in ecology. Random forests (RF) is a new and powerful statistical classifier that is well established in other disciplines but is relatively unknown in ecology. Advantages of RF compared to other statistical classifiers include (1) very high classification accuracy; (2) a novel method of determining variable importance; (3) ability to model complex interactions among predictor variables; (4) flexibility to perform several types of statistical data analysis, including regression, classification, survival analysis, and unsupervised learning; and (5) an algorithm for imputing missing values. We compared the accuracies of RF and four other commonly used statistical classifiers using data on invasive plant species presence in Lava Beds National Monument, California, USA, rare lichen species presence in the Pacific Northwest, USA, and nest sites for cavity nesting birds in the Uinta Mountains, Utah, USA. We observed high classification accuracy in all applications as measured by cross-validation and, in the case of the lichen data, by independent test data, when comparing RF to other common classification methods. We also observed that the variables that RF identified as most important for classifying invasive plant species coincided with expectations based on the literature.

[9]: This review presents a unified, efficient model of random decision forests which can be applied to a number of machine learning, computer vision, and medical image analysis tasks. Our model extends existing forest-based techniques as it unifies classification, regression, density estimation, manifold learning, semi-supervised learning, and active learning under the same decision forest framework. This gives us the opportunity to write and optimize the core implementation only once, with application to many diverse tasks. The proposed model may be used both in a discriminative or generative way and may be applied to discrete or continuous, labeled or unlabeled data. The main contributions of this review are: (1) Proposing a unified, probabilistic and efficient model for a variety of learning tasks; (2) Demonstrating margin-maximizing properties of classification forests; (3) Discussing probabilistic regression forests in comparison with other nonlinear regression algorithms; (4) Introducing density forests for estimating probability density functions; (5) Proposing an efficient algorithm for sampling from a density forest; (6) Introducing manifold forests for nonlinear dimensionality reduction; (7) Proposing new algorithms for transductive learning and active learning. Finally, we discuss how alternatives such as random ferns and extremely randomized trees stem from our more general forest model. This document is directed at both students who wish to learn the basics of decision forests, as well as researchers interested in the new contributions. It presents both fundamental and novel concepts in a structured way, with many illustrative examples and real-world applications. Thorough comparisons with state-of-the-art algorithms such as support vector machines, boosting and Gaussian processes are presented and relative advantages and disadvantages discussed. The many synthetic examples and existing commercial applications demonstrate the validity of the proposed model and its flexibility.

[10]: Much of previous attention on decision trees focuses on the splitting criteria and optimization of tree sizes. The dilemma between overfitting and achieving maximum accuracy is seldom resolved. A method to construct a decision tree based classifier is proposed that maintains highest accuracy on training data and improves on generalization accuracy as it grows in complexity. The classifier consists of multiple trees constructed systematically by pseudorandomly selecting subsets of components of the feature vector, that is, trees constructed in randomly chosen subspaces. The subspace method is compared to single-tree classifiers and other forest construction methods by experiments on publicly available datasets, where the method's superiority is demonstrated. We also discuss independence between trees in a forest and relate that to the combined classification accuracy.

[11]: This paper describes experiments, on two domains, to investigate the effect of averaging over predictions of multiple decision trees, instead of using a single tree. Other authors have pointed out theoretical and commonsense reasons for preferring the multiple tree approach. Ideally, we would like to consider predictions from all trees, weighted by their probability. However, there is a vast number of different trees, and it is difficult to estimate the probability of each tree. We sidestep the estimation problem by using a modified version of the ID3 algorithm to build good trees, and average over only these trees. Our results are encouraging. For each domain, we managed to produce a small number of good trees. We find that it is best to average across sets of trees with different structure; this usually gives better performance than any of the constituent trees, including the ID3 tree.

[12]:
Classic random forests introduced by Breiman [7] combine several decision trees [4] with bagging [12] . The main idea of random forests is based on the early work of [10] on the random subspace method, the feature selection work of [5] , the way of random split selection of [1] . Based on the seminal work of Breiman [7] , [11] suggests that it is best to average across sets of trees with different structures but not any of the constituent trees. [5]1 present a unified, efficient model of random decision forests which can be applied to a number of machine learning, computer vision and medical image analysis tasks. With the development of random forests in recent years, they have been applied to a wide variety of real world problems [2] , [3] , [8] , [6] .