Excited to attend my first PhD defence at TU Delft: Daniël Vos will be defending his thesis "Decision Tree Learning: Algorithms for Robust Prediction and Policy Optimization", containing work he did under supervision of Prof. Dr. Ir. R.L. Lagendijk and Dr. Ir. Sicco Verwer.
“How To Use A Decision Table Methodology To Analyze Complex Conditional Actions Requirements In Software Development” [2004], D Robert Baker (https://www.methodsandtools.com/archive/archive.php?id=39).
One question for the #MachineLearning people: what approach do you use to determine if a decision trees or a random forest approach should work better? Do you simply try both approaches and use whatever seems to work better?
According to what I read, decision trees are more prone to overfitting, while random forest is a more complex approach. Which means little to me 
Ever wondered how #DecisionTrees and #RandomForests 
are related? Here is a quick #tutorial that compares both methods in terms of #classification and #regression 
https://www.fabriziomusacchio.com/blog/2023-06-22-_decision_trees_vs_random_forests/
@Liesbeth_Smit #Communication #DecisionTrees In #Dutch, (but worth learning Dutch for): @Poldermanie
Hey friends in #networkscience #machinelearning #datascience - does someone have code for a configuration model for tree #graphs, tree #networks, or #decisiontrees? I don't want to reinvent the wheel if it's already out there #netsci #ml
On Monday Nov 21st, we'll have another R-ladies book club session 
We will discuss decision trees and bagging 
Chapters 9&10 from Hands-on Machine Learning with R.
Want to join us? More info here 
https://meetu.ps/e/LCRQs/vb6QR/i
@ParadeGrotesque @neil LAW AND ORDER / JUSTICE
Perhaps there's two sides to law and bullies...
There's the technical-law side of things (what's on paper to be law or rules)... and
then there is the 'it's whatever we say goes' kind of things in law what suits the bully or establishment (actually I consider USA both).
Literally the definitions where law / language itself has books and dictionaries for word running into hundreds it means the meanings are many meanings and so the contexts which they then can plot the court case upon... using those that conspire or simply those wanting to keep their job by pledging oath / allegiances to authority to just pick whichever meaning from that according to what line suits them (and their job)... lots of unsaid / undocumented stuff like nurses or medical stuff never officially told not to do or do but just follow or shunned if they don't do and somehow lose their job / get focused on negatively
Anyway this 2nd point is to show directly or indirectly a line of people in and out of law can somewhat choose what has more weight or validity as they go along to produce a certain outcome...
and coming back to topic point... this means they can get him on something as long as they focus on him negatively and drag it out in time to crack these types of nuts or thorns in their side. Pinning something or any excuses whatever they want to cover up / already ignoring helps... kinda proven by the whole 'illegal things go on but telling people is illegal'.
I think there are also people that run in between (advisers) that tweak this approach like a flow chart type thing... this + this + this = these decisions but of course I can't prove it other than common in humanity and very logical if you're serious about keeping your own authority / power while paying people in law or outside of it.
#LAW #MECHANICS #DECISIONTREES
rk T