Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evaluates expected depth to improve decision tree selection for faster inference, indicating efficiency gains.
Interpretable decision trees are usually selected by worst-case structural measures such as maximum depth or node count, although many deployments incur cost along the particular root-to-leaf path followed by each case. We study expected depth, the test-sample average number of internal decision tests, as a direct measure of average inference burden. The proposed soft-depth (Soft-D) selector chooses, from a cost-complexity pruning candidate path, the tree with minimum validation expected depth among candidates whose validation accuracy remains within a user-specified tolerance of the best candidate. Across eleven benchmark datasets and 25 outer test folds per dataset, Soft-D reduces expected depth by 47.4% relative to unpruned CART and by 12.1% relative to accuracy-first CCP at [Formula: see text]; a new depth-limited CART baseline confirms that the gain is strongest when a practitioner-selected maximum depth still leaves many samples on long paths. The analysis also shows that ε is a real accuracy-complexity hyperparameter, that refitting after selection can change expected depth in a measurable minority of folds, and that expected-depth selection coincides with node minimization in equal-cost CART paths but separates naturally under heterogeneous query costs. These results position expected-depth selection as a lightweight deployment-time model-selection layer rather than a replacement for globally optimal tree induction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: