3 ms·
Also, it might be worth adding that random forests are based on decision trees, which can be interpreted by humans. While it's hard to interpret a random fores
by JD557 11y ago
Also, it might be worth adding that random forests are based on decision trees, which can be interpreted by humans.
While it's hard to interpret a random forest, it's still much more interpretable than a neural network. Maybe this model is also easier to interpret by humans.
- Fede_V 11y agoRandom forests are very difficult to interpret especially once you start having lots of trees.
- rm999 11y ago>While it's hard to interpret a random forest, it's still much more interpretable than a neural network Depends on the domain. The first layer or two of a neural network can be fairly interpretable on image or spectrogram (sound) data, for example.