See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/389546882

Comparison of Neural Networks with Traditional Machine Learning Models (e.g.,

XGBoost, Random Forest)

Article · November 2025

CITATIONS READS

0 297

4 authors, including:

Susan Andrewson
Umm al-Qura University
136 PUBLICATIONS 12 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Susan Andrewson on 04 March 2025.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Comparison of Neural Networks with Traditional
Machine Learning Models (e.g., XGBoost, Random
Forest)
Author

Teslim Lekan, Joshua Cena, Alfie Harry

Abstract
The rapid advancement of machine learning has led to the development of various
modeling techniques, each with its strengths and limitations. This study compares the
performance of neural networks (NNs) with traditional machine learning models such
as XGBoost and Random Forest across multiple datasets and tasks. While neural
networks, particularly deep learning architectures, have gained significant attention for
their ability to capture complex, non-linear relationships in large-scale data, traditional
models like XGBoost and Random Forest remain highly effective for structured data and
tabular datasets.

The comparison focuses on key metrics such as accuracy, computational efficiency,

interpretability, and scalability. Neural networks often excel in tasks involving
unstructured data (e.g., images, text) and large datasets with high dimensionality,
leveraging their ability to learn hierarchical features. However, they typically require
substantial computational resources and extensive hyperparameter tuning. In contrast,
XGBoost and Random Forest are more interpretable, computationally efficient, and often
outperform neural networks on smaller, structured datasets.

This study also highlights the trade-offs between model complexity and performance,
emphasizing the importance of selecting the right model based on the problem domain,
data characteristics, and resource constraints. The findings suggest that while neural
networks are powerful tools for specific applications, traditional machine learning models
remain highly competitive and practical for many real-world scenarios. This comparison
provides valuable insights for practitioners and researchers in choosing the most
appropriate modeling approach for their specific use cases.

Introduction
The field of machine learning has witnessed remarkable progress over the past few
decades, with a proliferation of algorithms and techniques designed to tackle a wide
range of predictive and analytical tasks. Among these, neural networks (NNs),
particularly deep learning models, have emerged as a dominant paradigm, achieving
state-of-the-art performance in domains such as computer vision, natural language
processing, and speech recognition. However, traditional machine learning models
like XGBoost and Random Forest continue to play a critical role, especially in
structured data applications such as tabular data analysis, fraud detection, and
recommendation systems.

This study aims to provide a comprehensive comparison between neural networks and
traditional machine learning models, focusing on their performance across various
datasets and tasks. By evaluating key metrics such as accuracy, computational
efficiency, interpretability, and scalability, we seek to identify the strengths and
limitations of each approach. Additionally, we explore the trade-offs between model
complexity and performance, offering practical insights for practitioners and researchers
in selecting the most appropriate modeling technique for their specific use cases.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 provides an overview of

neural networks, XGBoost, and Random Forest, highlighting their underlying principles
and architectures. Section 3 describes the experimental setup, including datasets,
evaluation metrics, and implementation details. Section 4 presents the results and analysis,
comparing the performance of the models across different tasks. Finally, Section 5
discusses the implications of the findings and offers recommendations for future research.
Through this comparison, we aim to bridge the gap between modern and traditional
machine learning approaches, fostering a deeper understanding of their respective roles in
the evolving landscape of data science.

Brief Introduction to Neural Networks (NNs) and Traditional Machine Learning

Models

Neural Networks (NNs)

Neural networks are a class of machine learning models inspired by the structure and
function of the human brain. They consist of interconnected layers of nodes (or neurons),
which process input data through weighted connections and non-linear activation
functions. Key characteristics of neural networks include:

 Architecture: NNs are composed of an input layer, one or more hidden layers,
and an output layer. Deep neural networks (DNNs) have multiple hidden layers,
enabling them to learn hierarchical features from data.
 Learning Process: NNs use gradient-based optimization techniques (e.g.,
backpropagation) to minimize a loss function, adjusting weights iteratively to
improve performance.
 Strengths:
o Excel at capturing complex, non-linear relationships in data.
 o Highly effective for unstructured data like images, text, and audio.
o Scalable to large datasets and high-dimensional spaces.
 Challenges:
o Require significant computational resources and training time.
o Often need extensive hyperparameter tuning.
o Lack interpretability, making them "black-box" models.

Traditional Machine Learning Models

Traditional machine learning models, such as XGBoost and Random Forest, are widely
used for structured data and tabular datasets. These models are based on decision trees
and ensemble learning techniques, which combine multiple weak learners to create a
strong predictive model.

 XGBoost (Extreme Gradient Boosting):

o A scalable and efficient implementation of gradient boosting.
o Builds trees sequentially, with each tree correcting errors made by the
previous one.
o Known for its high accuracy, speed, and ability to handle missing data.
o Often outperforms other models on structured data competitions (e.g.,
Kaggle).
 Random Forest:
o An ensemble method that builds multiple decision trees and aggregates
their predictions.
o Uses bagging (bootstrap aggregating) to reduce overfitting and improve
generalization.
o Provides interpretability through feature importance scores.
o Robust to noise and outliers in the data.
 Strengths:
o Highly interpretable and easy to implement.
o Computationally efficient and require less tuning compared to NNs.
o Perform well on small to medium-sized structured datasets.
 Limitations:
o Less effective for unstructured data (e.g., images, text).
o May struggle with high-dimensional data compared to NNs.

Importance of Choosing the Right Model for Specific Tasks

Selecting the appropriate machine learning model for a given task is crucial for achieving
optimal performance, efficiency, and interpretability. Different tasks, such
as classification, regression, and prediction, have unique requirements and challenges,
and the choice of model can significantly impact the outcomes. Below are key reasons
why choosing the right model is essential:

1. Task-Specific Performance
 Classification Tasks:
o Models like Random Forest, XGBoost, and Support Vector Machines
(SVMs) are often effective for binary or multi-class classification problems.
o Neural networks, particularly Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs),
excel in image classification tasks.
 Regression Tasks:
o Linear regression, decision trees, and ensemble methods like Gradient
Boosting are commonly used for predicting continuous outcomes.
o Neural networks can also be applied to regression tasks, especially when
dealing with complex, non-linear relationships.

2. Data Characteristics
 Structured vs. Unstructured Data:
o Traditional models like XGBoost and Random Forest are well-suited for
structured, tabular data.
o Neural networks are more effective for unstructured data such as images,
text, and audio.
 Data Size and Dimensionality:
o For small to medium-sized datasets, traditional models often perform well
and are computationally efficient.
o Neural networks require large amounts of data to generalize effectively and
are better suited for high-dimensional data.

3. Computational Efficiency
 Resource Constraints:
o Traditional models like Random Forest and XGBoost are generally faster to
train and require less computational power compared to deep neural
networks.
o Neural networks, especially deep learning models, demand significant
computational resources and time, making them less practical for resource-
constrained environments.
 Scalability:
o Neural networks can scale to large datasets and complex problems but may
require specialized hardware (e.g., GPUs).
o Traditional models are more scalable for smaller datasets and can be run on
standard hardware.
4. Interpretability and Transparency
 Model Interpretability:
o Traditional models like decision trees and linear regression offer high
interpretability, making it easier to understand and explain the model's
decisions.
o Neural networks are often considered "black-box" models, with limited
interpretability, which can be a drawback in applications requiring
transparency (e.g., healthcare, finance).
 Regulatory and Ethical Considerations:
o In regulated industries, interpretable models are often preferred to ensure
compliance and ethical considerations.

5. Generalization and Overfitting

 Overfitting Risks:
o Neural networks, particularly deep learning models, are prone to overfitting,
especially with small datasets. Techniques like dropout and regularization
are required to mitigate this risk.
o Traditional models like Random Forest and XGBoost have built-in
mechanisms (e.g., bagging, boosting) to reduce overfitting and improve
generalization.

6. Domain-Specific Requirements
 Industry-Specific Needs:
o In domains like healthcare, interpretability and accuracy are paramount,
making traditional models or simpler neural networks more suitable.
o In domains like computer vision or natural language processing, the
complexity of data often necessitates the use of deep learning models.

Overview of Neural Networks

Definition and Architecture

Neural networks (NNs) are computational models inspired by the structure and function
of the human brain. They consist of interconnected layers of nodes, or neurons, that
process input data to produce output predictions. The basic architecture includes:

 Layers:
o Input Layer: Receives the initial data.
o Hidden Layers: Intermediate layers that transform inputs through weighted
connections and activation functions.
 o Output Layer: Produces the final prediction or classification.
 Neurons: Basic units that receive inputs, apply weights, and pass the result
through an activation function.
 Activation Functions: Introduce non-linearity into the model, enabling it to learn
complex patterns. Common activation functions include:
o ReLU (Rectified Linear Unit): f(x)=max⁡(0,x)f(x)=max(0,x).
o Sigmoid: f(x)=11+e−xf(x)=1+e−x1​ .
o Tanh: f(x)=tanh⁡(x)f(x)=tanh(x).

Types of Neural Networks

Neural networks come in various architectures, each suited for specific types of data and
tasks:

 Feedforward Neural Networks (FNNs):

o The simplest type, where data flows in one direction from input to output.
o Used for basic classification and regression tasks.
 Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs):
o Designed for image and video data.
o Use convolutional layers to automatically detect spatial hierarchies of
features (e.g., edges, textures).
 Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs):
o Suitable for sequential data like time-series, text, and speech.
o Use loops to retain information from previous inputs, enabling them to
capture temporal dependencies.
o Variants include Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) and Gated
Recurrent Units (GRUs), which address the vanishing gradient problem.
 Other Types:
o Autoencoders: Used for unsupervised learning and dimensionality
reduction.
o Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs): Used for generating synthetic
data.

Strengths

Neural networks offer several advantages that make them powerful tools for machine
learning:

 Ability to Model Complex, Non-Linear Relationships:

o NNs can capture intricate patterns and interactions in data, making them
suitable for highly complex tasks.
 Superior Performance on Large-Scale Datasets:
 o They excel in domains like image recognition, natural language processing,
and time-series analysis, where large amounts of data are available.
 Feature Learning:
o NNs automatically extract relevant features from raw data, reducing the
need for manual feature engineering.
 Versatility:
o Can be applied to a wide range of tasks, including classification, regression,
clustering, and generation.

Weaknesses

Despite their strengths, neural networks have several limitations:

 Computationally Expensive and Resource-Intensive:

o Training deep neural networks requires significant computational power
and memory, often necessitating specialized hardware like GPUs or TPUs.
 Requires Large Amounts of Labeled Data:
o NNs typically need extensive labeled datasets to generalize well, which can
be costly and time-consuming to obtain.
 Black-Box Nature:
o The internal workings of NNs are often opaque, making it difficult to
interpret and explain their decisions. This lack of transparency can be a
drawback in applications requiring accountability and trust.
 Overfitting:
o NNs are prone to overfitting, especially with small datasets. Techniques
like dropout, regularization, and data augmentation are often required to
mitigate this risk.
 Hyperparameter Sensitivity:
o Performance heavily depends on the choice of hyperparameters (e.g.,
learning rate, number of layers), which can require extensive tuning.

Overview of Traditional Machine Learning Models

Definition and Key Models

Traditional machine learning models are a class of algorithms that have been widely used
for decades to solve various predictive and analytical tasks. These models are particularly
effective for structured and tabular data. Key models include:

 XGBoost (Extreme Gradient Boosting):

 oA scalable and efficient implementation of gradient boosting.
oBuilds decision trees sequentially, with each tree correcting errors made by
the previous one.
o Known for its high accuracy, speed, and ability to handle missing data.
 Random Forest:
o An ensemble method that builds multiple decision trees and aggregates
their predictions.
o Uses bagging (bootstrap aggregating) to reduce overfitting and improve
generalization.
o Provides interpretability through feature importance scores.
 Support Vector Machines (SVM):
o A powerful model for classification and regression tasks.
o Finds the optimal hyperplane that separates data points of different classes.
o Effective in high-dimensional spaces and for cases where the number of
dimensions exceeds the number of samples.
 Logistic Regression:
o A linear model used for binary classification tasks.
o Estimates the probability of a binary outcome based on one or more
predictor variables.
 Other Models:
o k-Nearest Neighbors (k-NN): A simple, instance-based learning algorithm.
o Decision Trees: A non-parametric model that splits data into branches to
make predictions.
o Linear Regression: A basic model for predicting continuous outcomes.

Strengths

Traditional machine learning models offer several advantages that make them highly
effective for many tasks:

 Interpretability:
o Models like decision trees, Random Forest, and logistic regression are
easier to understand and explain, making them suitable for applications
requiring transparency.
 Efficient on Structured/Tabular Data:
o These models perform exceptionally well on structured data, often
outperforming neural networks in such scenarios.
 Requires Less Computational Power and Smaller Datasets:
o Traditional models are computationally efficient and can be trained on
smaller datasets, making them practical for resource-constrained
environments.
 Robust to Overfitting:
 o Techniques like bagging (Random Forest) and boosting (XGBoost) help
mitigate overfitting, improving generalization.
 Ease of Implementation:
o These models are straightforward to implement and require less
hyperparameter tuning compared to neural networks.

Weaknesses

Despite their strengths, traditional machine learning models have several limitations:

 Limited Ability to Model Complex, Non-Linear Relationships:

o Traditional models may struggle to capture intricate patterns and
interactions in data, especially compared to neural networks.
 Requires Manual Feature Engineering:
o The performance of these models heavily depends on the quality of feature
engineering, which can be time-consuming and require domain expertise.
 Performance Plateaus on Very Large or High-Dimensional Datasets:
o Traditional models may not scale as effectively as neural networks for very
large datasets or high-dimensional data (e.g., images, text).
 Less Effective for Unstructured Data:
o These models are generally not well-suited for unstructured data like
images, audio, and text, where neural networks excel.
 Sensitivity to Data Quality:
o Traditional models can be sensitive to noise, outliers, and missing data,
requiring careful preprocessing.

Key Comparison Criteria

When comparing neural networks (NNs) and traditional machine learning

models (e.g., XGBoost, Random Forest), several key criteria must be considered to
determine the most suitable model for a given task. Below are the primary factors for
comparison:

1. Performance
 Metrics:
o Accuracy: Overall correctness of predictions.
o Precision: Proportion of true positives among predicted positives.
o Recall: Proportion of true positives identified correctly.
o F1-Score: Harmonic mean of precision and recall.
 oAUC-ROC: Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for
classification tasks.
 Comparison:
o Neural networks often outperform traditional models on complex,
unstructured data (e.g., images, text) due to their ability to learn hierarchical
features.
o Traditional models like XGBoost and Random Forest frequently achieve
competitive or superior performance on structured/tabular data.

2. Scalability
 Handling Large Datasets:
o Neural networks scale well to very large datasets, especially with
distributed training and hardware acceleration (e.g., GPUs, TPUs).
o Traditional models like XGBoost and Random Forest are efficient for small
to medium-sized datasets but may struggle with extremely large datasets.
 High-Dimensional Data:
o Neural networks excel in high-dimensional spaces (e.g., images, text
embeddings).
o Traditional models may require dimensionality reduction techniques (e.g.,
PCA) to handle high-dimensional data effectively.

3. Interpretability
 Neural Networks:
o Generally considered "black-box" models, making it difficult to interpret
their predictions.
o Techniques like SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) and LIME (Local
Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations) can provide some insights but
are not as straightforward as traditional models.
 Traditional Models:
o Highly interpretable, especially decision trees, Random Forest, and linear
models.
o Feature importance scores and decision rules are readily available, making
them suitable for applications requiring transparency (e.g., healthcare,
finance).

4. Training Time and Computational Resources

 Neural Networks:
 oRequire significant computational resources and time for training,
especially deep learning models.
o Benefit from specialized hardware (e.g., GPUs) for efficient training.
 Traditional Models:
o Generally faster to train and require less computational power.
o Can be run on standard hardware, making them more accessible for
resource-constrained environments.

5. Data Requirements
 Neural Networks:
o Require large amounts of labeled data to generalize effectively.
o Data augmentation techniques are often used to artificially increase dataset
size.
 Traditional Models:
o Perform well with smaller datasets and require less labeled data.
o Less dependent on data volume, making them suitable for scenarios with
limited data availability.

6. Robustness
 Handling Noise and Missing Data:
o Traditional models like Random Forest and XGBoost are robust to noise
and missing data, often handling them implicitly.
o Neural networks require careful preprocessing (e.g., imputation,
normalization) to handle noisy or incomplete data.
 Overfitting:
o Neural networks are prone to overfitting, especially with small datasets.
Regularization techniques (e.g., dropout, weight decay) are essential.
o Traditional models like Random Forest use ensemble methods (e.g.,
bagging) to reduce overfitting, while XGBoost incorporates regularization
in its objective function.

Summary Table of Comparison

Criterion Neural Networks Traditional Models

Performance Superior on unstructured/complex Strong on structured/tabular
Criterion Neural Networks Traditional Models
data data
Excellent for large datasets and Efficient for small to medium
Scalability
high dimensions datasets
High (e.g., feature importance,
Interpretability Low (black-box)
decision rules)
Training Low (runs on standard
High (requires GPUs/TPUs)
Time/Resources hardware)
Data Requirements Large labeled datasets Smaller datasets suffice
Sensitive to noise/missing data; Robust to noise/missing data;
Robustness
prone to overfitting less overfitting

Comparison of Neural Networks and Traditional Models

Below is a detailed comparison of neural networks (NNs) and traditional machine

learning models (e.g., XGBoost, Random Forest) across various dimensions,
highlighting their strengths and weaknesses in different scenarios.

1. Structured/Tabular Data
 Traditional Models:
o Often outperform neural networks on structured/tabular data.
o Example: XGBoost and Random Forest are dominant in Kaggle
competitions involving tabular datasets.
o Reason: These models are designed to handle structured data efficiently and
can capture interactions between features without requiring extensive
tuning.
 Neural Networks:
o Typically underperform on structured data unless specifically designed (e.g.,
TabNet, DeepFM).
o Require significant preprocessing and hyperparameter tuning to achieve
competitive results.
2. Unstructured Data
 Neural Networks:
o Excel in handling unstructured data like images, text, and audio.
o Example:
 CNNs (Convolutional Neural Networks): State-of-the-art for
image classification and object detection.
 RNNs (Recurrent Neural Networks) and Transformers:
Dominant in natural language processing (NLP) tasks like text
generation and translation.
o Reason: NNs can automatically learn hierarchical features from raw data,
eliminating the need for manual feature engineering.
 Traditional Models:
o Generally ineffective for unstructured data.
o Require extensive feature engineering and preprocessing to handle such
data, which is often impractical.

3. Feature Engineering
 Traditional Models:
o Rely heavily on manual feature engineering to extract meaningful patterns
from data.
o Example: Creating interaction terms, polynomial features, or domain-
specific transformations.
 Neural Networks:
o Automatically learn relevant features from raw data, reducing the need for
manual intervention.
o Example: CNNs learn spatial hierarchies in images, while RNNs capture
temporal dependencies in sequences.

4. Training Time
 Traditional Models:
o Faster to train on smaller datasets.
o Example: XGBoost and Random Forest can train on medium-sized datasets
in minutes to hours on standard hardware.
 Neural Networks:
o Require more time and computational resources for training, especially
deep learning models.
o Example: Training a deep CNN on large image datasets can take hours to
days, often requiring GPUs or TPUs.
 o However, NNs scale better with very large datasets due to parallelization
and hardware acceleration.

5. Interpretability
 Traditional Models:
o Highly interpretable, making them suitable for applications requiring
transparency.
o Example:
 Random Forest provides feature importance scores.
 Decision trees offer clear decision rules.
 Neural Networks:
o Often considered "black-box" models due to their complexity.
o Techniques like SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) and LIME
(Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations) are improving
interpretability but are not as straightforward as traditional models.

6. Handling Non-Linearity
 Neural Networks:
o Excel at capturing complex, non-linear relationships in data.
o Example: Deep learning models can model highly non-linear decision
boundaries in image or text data.
 Traditional Models:
o May struggle with highly non-linear data without extensive feature
engineering.
o Example: XGBoost and Random Forest can model non-linear relationships
but may require careful tuning and feature transformations.

Summary Table of Comparison

Criterion Neural Networks Traditional Models

Structured/Tabular Underperform unless Often outperform (e.g.,
Data specifically designed XGBoost, Random Forest)
Excel (e.g., CNNs for images, Ineffective without extensive
Unstructured Data
RNNs for text) preprocessing
Criterion Neural Networks Traditional Models
Require manual feature
Feature Engineering Automatically learn features
engineering
Slower, but scales well with
Training Time Faster on smaller datasets
large datasets
Black-box; improving with
Interpretability Highly interpretable
SHAP, LIME
Handling Non- Excellent at capturing complex May struggle without feature
Linearity relationships engineering

Hybrid Approaches

Combining the strengths of neural networks (NNs) and traditional machine learning
models can lead to more robust and accurate solutions. Below are two common hybrid
approaches:

1. Combining Strengths
 Using Traditional Models for Feature Selection and NNs for Final Prediction:
o Traditional models like Random Forest or XGBoost can be used to identify
the most important features from structured data.
o These selected features are then fed into a neural network for final
prediction, leveraging the NN's ability to model complex relationships.
o Example:
 Use Random Forest to rank feature importance in a tabular dataset.
 Train a neural network using only the top-ranked features, reducing
dimensionality and improving model efficiency.

2. Ensemble Methods
 Combining Predictions from Both NNs and Traditional Models:
o Ensemble methods aggregate predictions from multiple models to improve
overall accuracy and robustness.
 o For example, the predictions from a neural network and XGBoost can be
combined using techniques like:
 Averaging: Taking the mean of predictions.
 Weighted Averaging: Assigning weights based on model
performance.
 Stacking: Using a meta-model (e.g., logistic regression) to combine
predictions.
o Example:
 Train a CNN for image classification and an XGBoost model on
extracted image features.
 Combine their predictions using a stacking ensemble to achieve
higher accuracy.

Challenges and Limitations

Both neural networks and traditional models have inherent challenges and limitations,
which must be considered when designing hybrid approaches or selecting a model for a
specific task.

Neural Networks
 High Computational Cost:
o Training deep neural networks requires significant computational resources
(e.g., GPUs, TPUs) and time.
o Inference can also be slow, especially for large models.
 Difficulty in Interpreting Results:
o NNs are often considered "black-box" models, making it challenging to
explain their predictions.
o Techniques like SHAP and LIME help but are not as intuitive as traditional
model explanations.
 Requires Expertise in Hyperparameter Tuning:
o NNs have many hyperparameters (e.g., learning rate, number of layers,
activation functions), and tuning them requires expertise and
experimentation.
 Data Requirements:
o NNs typically require large amounts of labeled data to generalize
effectively, which can be costly and time-consuming to obtain.
Traditional Models
 Limited Ability to Handle Unstructured Data:
o Traditional models struggle with unstructured data like images, text, and
audio, where NNs excel.
o Extensive feature engineering is often required to adapt these models to
such tasks.
 Performance Plateaus on Complex Tasks:
o Traditional models may not capture highly complex, non-linear
relationships as effectively as NNs.
o Example: XGBoost and Random Forest may underperform on tasks like
image recognition or natural language processing.
 Scalability Issues:
o While efficient for small to medium-sized datasets, traditional models may
struggle with very large datasets or high-dimensional data.
 Manual Feature Engineering:
o Traditional models rely heavily on manual feature engineering, which can
be time-consuming and require domain expertise.

Summary of Challenges

Aspect Neural Networks Traditional Models

High (requires
Computational Cost Low (runs on standard hardware)
GPUs/TPUs)
High (e.g., feature importance,
Interpretability Low (black-box)
decision rules)
Hyperparameter Tuning Requires expertise Easier to tune
Data Requirements Large labeled datasets Smaller datasets suffice
Handling Unstructured Excellent (e.g., images, Limited (requires extensive
Data text) preprocessing)
Performance on Complex Superior for complex, non- May plateau on highly complex
Tasks linear tasks tasks

Conclusion
Summary of Key Findings
1. Neural Networks:
o Excel in handling unstructured data (e.g., images, text, audio) and
modeling complex, non-linear relationships.
o Require significant computational resources, large labeled datasets,
and expertise in hyperparameter tuning.
o Often considered black-box models, though techniques like SHAP and
LIME are improving interpretability.
2. Traditional Models:
o Highly effective for structured/tabular data,
offering interpretability, efficiency, and robustness.
o Require manual feature engineering and may struggle with highly
complex tasks or unstructured data.
o Examples like XGBoost and Random Forest dominate in structured data
applications (e.g., Kaggle competitions).

Recommendations
1. Choose Neural Networks When:
o The task involves unstructured data (e.g., image classification, natural
language processing).
o The problem requires modeling complex, non-linear relationships.
o Sufficient computational resources and labeled data are available.
2. Choose Traditional Models When:
o The task involves structured/tabular data.
o Interpretability and transparency are critical (e.g., healthcare, finance).
o Resources are limited, or the dataset is small to medium-sized.
3. Consider Hybrid Approaches:
o Combine the strengths of both approaches, such as using traditional models
for feature selection and neural networks for final prediction.
o Use ensemble methods to aggregate predictions from both types of models
for improved accuracy and robustness.

Final Thoughts

The choice between neural networks and traditional machine learning models is not one-
size-fits-all. It depends on the specific problem, the nature of the data, and
the resources available. While neural networks offer unparalleled capabilities for
complex tasks, traditional models remain indispensable for their efficiency,
interpretability, and performance on structured data.
 As the field of machine learning continues to evolve, advancements in hybrid
approaches, automated machine learning (AutoML), and interpretability
techniques are likely to further blur the lines between these approaches. This will lead to
the development of more versatile and powerful models, enabling practitioners to tackle
increasingly complex real-world challenges with greater ease and effectiveness.

By understanding the strengths, weaknesses, and trade-offs of each approach,

practitioners can make informed decisions and design solutions that are both effective
and practical for their specific use cases.

References
Pillai, A. S. (2022). A natural language processing approach to grouping students by
shared interests. Journal of Empirical Social Science Studies, 6(1), 1-16.

Pillai, A. (2023). Traffic Surveillance Systems through Advanced Detection, Tracking,

and Classification Technique. International Journal of Sustainable Infrastructure for
Cities and Societies, 8(9), 11-23.

Pillai, A. S. (2023). Advancements in natural language processing for automotive virtual

assistants enhancing user experience and safety. Journal of Computational Intelligence
and Robotics, 3(1), 27-36.

Pillai, A. S. (2022). Cardiac disease prediction with tabular neural network.

Nanda, A. S. (2024). AI in Treasury Management: EnhancingBank’sTreasury System for

Budget Execution in the MediumTerm. International Journal of Science and Research
(IJSR), 13(3), 1906–1912. https://doi.org/10.21275/sr24712003517

View publication stats