Machine Learning is the study of methods for programming computers to learn. Computers are applied to a wide range of tasks, and for most of these it is relatively easy for programmers to design and implement the necessary software. However, there are many tasks for which this is difficult or impossible. These can be divided into four general categories. First, there are problems for which there exist no human experts. For example, in modern automated manufacturing facilities, there is a need to predict machine failures before they occur by analyzing sensor readings. Because the machines are new, there are no human experts who can be interviewed by a programmer to provide the knowledge necessary to build a computer system. A machine learning system can study recorded data and subsequent machine failures and learn prediction rules. Second, there are problems where human experts exist, but where they are unable to explain their expertise. This is the case in many perceptual tasks, such as speech recognition, hand-writing recognition, and natural language understanding. Virtually all humans exhibit expert-level abilities on these tasks, but none of them can describe the detailed steps that they follow as they perform them. Fortunately, humans can provide machines with examples of the inputs and correct outputs for these tasks, so machine learning algorithms can learn to map the inputs to the outputs. Third, there are problems where phenomena are changing rapidly. In finance, for example, people would like to predict the future behavior of the stock market, of consumer purchases, or of exchange rates. These behaviors change frequently, so that even if a programmer could construct a good predictive computer program, it would need to be rewritten frequently. A learning program can relieve the programmer of this burden by constantly modifying and tuning a set of learned prediction rules. Fourth, there are applications that need to be customized for each computer user separately. Consider, for example, a program to filter unwanted electronic mail messages. Different users will need different filters. It is unreasonable to expect each user to program his or her own rules, and it is infeasible to provide every user with a software engineer to keep the rules up-to-date. A machine learning system can learn which mail messages the user rejects and maintain the filtering rules automatically. Machine learning addresses many of the same research questions as the fields of statistics, data mining, and psychology, but with differences of emphasis. Statistics focuses on understanding the phenomena that have generated the data, often with the goal of testing different hypotheses about those phenomena. Data mining seeks to find patterns in the data that are understandable by people. Psychological studies of human learning aspire to understand the mechanisms underlying the various learning behaviors exhibited by people (concept learning, skill acquisition, strategy change, etc.).

Machine learning

/pdf/convex-analysisnoer-san-nojin-zhan-nituite-5dl2rbmoyr.pdf

Convex Analysisの二,三の進展について

We propose a framework for analyzing and comparing distributions, which we use to construct statistical tests to determine if two samples are drawn from different distributions. Our test statistic is the largest difference in expectations over functions in the unit ball of a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS), and is called the maximum mean discrepancy (MMD).We present two distribution free tests based on large deviation bounds for the MMD, and a third test based on the asymptotic distribution of this statistic. The MMD can be computed in quadratic time, although efficient linear time approximations are available. Our statistic is an instance of an integral probability metric, and various classical metrics on distributions are obtained when alternative function classes are used in place of an RKHS. We apply our two-sample tests to a variety of problems, including attribute matching for databases using the Hungarian marriage method, where they perform strongly. Excellent performance is also obtained when comparing distributions over graphs, for which these are the first such tests.

/pdf/a-kernel-two-sample-test-2mr8hwo4ml.pdf

A kernel two-sample test

On robust estimation of the location parameter

Recent studies reveal that a deep neural network can learn transferable features which generalize well to novel tasks for domain adaptation. However, as deep features eventually transition from general to specific along the network, the feature transferability drops significantly in higher layers with increasing domain discrepancy. Hence, it is important to formally reduce the dataset bias and enhance the transferability in task-specific layers. In this paper, we propose a new Deep Adaptation Network (DAN) architecture, which generalizes deep convolutional neural network to the domain adaptation scenario. In DAN, hidden representations of all task-specific layers are embedded in a reproducing kernel Hilbert space where the mean embeddings of different domain distributions can be explicitly matched. The domain discrepancy is further reduced using an optimal multi-kernel selection method for mean embedding matching. DAN can learn transferable features with statistical guarantees, and can scale linearly by unbiased estimate of kernel embedding. Extensive empirical evidence shows that the proposed architecture yields state-of-the-art image classification error rates on standard domain adaptation benchmarks.

Learning Transferable Features with Deep Adaptation Networks

A Hilbert space embedding for probability measures has recently been proposed, with applications including dimensionality reduction, homogeneity testing, and independence testing. This embedding represents any probability measure as a mean element in a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS). A pseudometric on the space of probability measures can be defined as the distance between distribution embeddings: we denote this as γk, indexed by the kernel function k that defines the inner product in the RKHS.

We present three theoretical properties of γk. First, we consider the question of determining the conditions on the kernel k for which γk is a metric: such k are denoted characteristic kernels. Unlike pseudometrics, a metric is zero only when two distributions coincide, thus ensuring the RKHS embedding maps all distributions uniquely (i.e., the embedding is injective). While previously published conditions may apply only in restricted circumstances (e.g., on compact domains), and are difficult to check, our conditions are straightforward and intuitive: integrally strictly positive definite kernels are characteristic. Alternatively, if a bounded continuous kernel is translation-invariant on ℜd, then it is characteristic if and only if the support of its Fourier transform is the entire ℜd. Second, we show that the distance between distributions under γk results from an interplay between the properties of the kernel and the distributions, by demonstrating that distributions are close in the embedding space when their differences occur at higher frequencies. Third, to understand the nature of the topology induced by γk, we relate γk to other popular metrics on probability measures, and present conditions on the kernel k under which γk metrizes the weak topology.

/pdf/hilbert-space-embeddings-and-metrics-on-probability-measures-rak7908ncy.pdf

Hilbert Space Embeddings and Metrics on Probability Measures

Given samples from distributions p and q, a two-sample test determines whether to reject the null hypothesis that p = q, based on the value of a test statistic measuring the distance between the samples. One choice of test statistic is the maximum mean discrepancy (MMD), which is a distance between embeddings of the probability distributions in a reproducing kernel Hilbert space. The kernel used in obtaining these embeddings is critical in ensuring the test has high power, and correctly distinguishes unlike distributions with high probability. A means of parameter selection for the two-sample test based on the MMD is proposed. For a given test level (an upper bound on the probability of making a Type I error), the kernel is chosen so as to maximize the test power, and minimize the probability of making a Type II error. The test statistic, test threshold, and optimization over the kernel parameters are obtained with cost linear in the sample size. These properties make the kernel selection and test procedures suited to data streams, where the observations cannot all be stored in memory. In experiments, the new kernel selection approach yields a more powerful test than earlier kernel selection heuristics.

/pdf/optimal-kernel-choice-for-large-scale-two-sample-tests-53bmtv0y30.pdf

Optimal kernel choice for large-scale two-sample tests

The concave-convex procedure (CCCP) is a majorization-minimization algorithm that solves d.c. (difference of convex functions) programs as a sequence of convex programs. In machine learning, CCCP is extensively used in many learning algorithms like sparse support vector machines (SVMs), transductive SVMs, sparse principal component analysis, etc. Though widely used in many applications, the convergence behavior of CCCP has not gotten a lot of specific attention. Yuille and Rangarajan analyzed its convergence in their original paper, however, we believe the analysis is not complete. Although the convergence of CCCP can be derived from the convergence of the d.c. algorithm (DCA), its proof is more specialized and technical than actually required for the specific case of CCCP. In this paper, we follow a different reasoning and show how Zangwill's global convergence theory of iterative algorithms provides a natural framework to prove the convergence of CCCP, allowing a more elegant and simple proof. This underlines Zangwill's theory as a powerful and general framework to deal with the convergence issues of iterative algorithms, after also being used to prove the convergence of algorithms like expectation-maximization, generalized alternating minimization, etc. In this paper, we provide a rigorous analysis of the convergence of CCCP by addressing these questions: (i) When does CCCP find a local minimum or a stationary point of the d.c. program under consideration? (ii) When does the sequence generated by CCCP converge? We also present an open problem on the issue of local convergence of CCCP.

/pdf/on-the-convergence-of-the-concave-convex-procedure-336dmlo47w.pdf

On the Convergence of the Concave-Convex Procedure

We provide a unifying framework linking two classes of statistics used in two-sample and independence testing: on the one hand, the energy distances and distance covariances from the statistics literature; on the other, maximum mean discrepancies (MMD), that is, distances between embeddings of distributions to reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces (RKHS), as established in machine learning. In the case where the energy distance is computed with a semimetric of negative type, a positive definite kernel, termed distance kernel, may be defined such that the MMD corresponds exactly to the energy distance. Conversely, for any positive definite kernel, we can interpret the MMD as energy distance with respect to some negative-type semimetric. This equivalence readily extends to distance covariance using kernels on the product space. We determine the class of probability distributions for which the test statistics are consistent against all alternatives. Finally, we investigate the performance of the family of distance kernels in two-sample and independence tests: we show in particular that the energy distance most commonly employed in statistics is just one member of a parametric family of kernels, and that other choices from this family can yield more powerful tests.

Equivalence of distance-based and RKHS-based statistics in hypothesis testing

A Hilbert space embedding of a distribution—in short, a kernel mean embedding—has recently emerged as a powerful tool for machine learning and statistical inference. The basic idea behind this framework is to map distributions into a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS) in which the whole arsenal of kernel methods can be extended to probability measures. It can be viewed as a generalization of the original “feature map” common to support vector machines (SVMs) and other kernel methods. In addition to the classical applications of kernel methods, the kernel mean embedding has found novel applications in ﬁelds ranging from probabilistic modeling to statistical inference, causal discovery, and deep learning. Kernel Mean Embedding of Distributions: A Review and Beyond provides a comprehensive review of existing work and recent advances in this research area, and to discuss some of the most challenging issues and open problems that could potentially lead to new research directions. The targeted audience includes graduate students and researchers in machine learning and statistics who are interested in the theory and applications of kernel mean embeddings.

/pdf/kernel-mean-embedding-of-distributions-a-review-and-beyond-164dislwzo.pdf

Bharath K. Sriperumbudur

Papers

Hilbert Space Embeddings and Metrics on Probability Measures

Optimal kernel choice for large-scale two-sample tests

On the Convergence of the Concave-Convex Procedure

Equivalence of distance-based and RKHS-based statistics in hypothesis testing

Kernel Mean Embedding of Distributions: A Review and Beyond