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.

Appears in Proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI1988)