Classification procedures are some of the most widely used statistical methods in ecology. Random forests (RF) is a new and powerful statistical classifier that is well established in other disciplines but is relatively unknown in ecology. Advantages of RF compared to other statistical classifiers include (1) very high classification accuracy; (2) a novel method of determining variable importance; (3) ability to model complex interactions among predictor variables; (4) flexibility to perform several types of statistical data analysis, including regression, classification, survival analysis, and unsupervised learning; and (5) an algorithm for imputing missing values. We compared the accuracies of RF and four other commonly used statistical classifiers using data on invasive plant species presence in Lava Beds National Monument, California, USA, rare lichen species presence in the Pacific Northwest, USA, and nest sites for cavity nesting birds in the Uinta Mountains, Utah, USA. We observed high classification accuracy in all applications as measured by cross‐validation and, in the case of the lichen data, by independent test data, when comparing RF to other common classification methods. We also observed that the variables that RF identified as most important for classifying invasive plant species coincided with expectations based on the literature.

In many machine learning problems, understanding variable importance is a central concern. Two common approaches are Permute-and-Predict (PaP), which randomly permutes a feature in a validation set, and Leave-One-Covariate-Out (LOCO), which retrains models after permuting a training feature. Both methods deem a variable important if predictions with the original data substantially outperform those with permutations. In linear regression, empirical studies have linked PaP to regression coefficients and LOCO to $t$-statistics, but a formal theory has been lacking. We derive closed-form expressions for both measures, expressed using square-root transformations. PaP is shown to be proportional to the coefficient and predictor variability: $\text{PaP}_i = β_i \sqrt{2\operatorname{Var}(\mathbf{x}^v_i)}$, while LOCO is proportional to the coefficient but dampened by collinearity (captured by $Δ$): $\text{LOCO}_i = β_i (1 -Δ)\sqrt{1 + c}$. These derivations explain why PaP is largely unaffected by multicollinearity, whereas LOCO is highly sensitive to it. Monte Carlo simulations confirm these findings across varying levels of collinearity. Although derived for linear regression, we also show that these results provide reasonable approximations for models like Random Forests. Overall, this work establishes a theoretical basis for two widely used importance measures, helping analysts understand how they are affected by the true coefficients, dimension, and covariance structure. This work bridges empirical evidence and theory, enhancing the interpretability and application of variable importance measures.