How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
AdaBoost's exponential training-loss and nonpositive-margin bound
Statement
Let be a finite sequence of completed rounds of finite-sample AdaBoost.M1, with weighted errors , scores , and . Then
and
The empty product for is . Under the algorithm's tie rule, the empirical classification error is also at most this product. This is a finite training-margin bound only and makes no test-generalization claim.
Statement references
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A fixed finite binary-labeled sample and a finite sequence of completed rounds with .
Finite-sample AdaBoost.M1 with half-log coefficients: The initialization is and .
Finite-sample AdaBoost.M1 with half-log coefficients: The weighted error is .
Finite-sample AdaBoost.M1 with half-log coefficients: For , and .
Finite-sample AdaBoost.M1 with half-log coefficients: The update is and .
Finite-sample AdaBoost.M1 with half-log coefficients: The classifier uses for and for , so ties are assigned to .
Proof
The initial weights sum to by [F1]. Inductively assume the weights at round sum to ; by [F2], the total weights on correct and incorrect examples are and . For a temporary coefficient , the exponential reweighting sum is . Its second derivative is positive, and vanishes uniquely at , which equals the algorithm's coefficient by [F3]. Substitution gives . By [F4], the next weights divide the reweighted terms by this exact sum, so they also sum to . Induction proves normalization at every round and the stated minimization formula.
Put . By [F1], and . If , then [F4] gives . Step 1.1 establishes that the weights normalize, so the update denominator is the sum of the reweighted terms and . Induction yields .
If , then ; if the margin is positive, its indicator is zero. Hence each nonpositive-margin indicator is at most its exponential term, and summing and applying step 2.1 proves the stated bound. By [F5], a misclassified positive-label example has negative margin and a misclassified negative-label example has nonpositive margin, so training error is no larger than the bounded nonpositive-margin fraction.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · one level
1 result within one dependency step of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Trevor Hastie, Robert Tibshirani, and Jerome Friedman, The Elements of Statistical Learning, 2nd ed., 12th printing (standard reference, not scraped)
- Robert E. Schapire, "The Boosting Approach to Machine Learning: An Overview," MSRI Workshop on Nonlinear Estimation and Classification, 2002 (standard reference, not scraped)