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

Probability Distributions.- Linear Models for Regression.- Linear Models for Classification.- Neural Networks.- Kernel Methods.- Sparse Kernel Machines.- Graphical Models.- Mixture Models and EM.- Approximate Inference.- Sampling Methods.- Continuous Latent Variables.- Sequential Data.- Combining Models.

Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning

Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain—3-Dimensional Proportional System: An Approach to Cerebral Imaging, J. Talairach, P. Tournoux. Georg Thieme Verlag, New York (1988), 122 pp., 130 figs. DM 268

I have developed "tennis elbow" from lugging this book around the past four weeks, but it is worth the pain, the effort, and the aspirin. It is also worth the (relatively speaking) bargain price. Including appendixes, this book contains 894 pages of text. The entire panorama of the neural sciences is surveyed and examined, and it is comprehensive in its scope, from genomes to social behaviors. The editors explicitly state that the book is designed as "an introductory text for students of biology, behavior, and medicine," but it is hard to imagine any audience, interested in any fragment of neuroscience at any level of sophistication, that would not enjoy this book. The editors have done a masterful job of weaving together the biologic, the behavioral, and the clinical sciences into a single tapestry in which everyone from the molecular biologist to the practicing psychiatrist can find and appreciate his or

Principles of Neural Science

How to Do Things With Words

— We advance a novel computational model of multi-agent, cooperative joint actions that is grounded in the cognitive framework of active inference. The model assumes that to solve a joint task, such as pressing together a red or blue button, two (or more) agents engage in a process of interactive inference. Each agent maintains probabilistic beliefs about the joint goal (e.g., should we press the red or blue button?) and updates them by observing the other agent’s movements, while in turn selecting movements that make his own intentions legible and easy to infer by the other agent (i.e., sensorimotor communication). Over time, the interactive inference aligns both the beliefs and the behavioral strategies of the agents, hence ensuring the success of the joint action. We exemplify the functioning of the model in two simulations. The first simulation illustrates a “leaderless” joint action. It shows that when two agents lack a strong preference about their joint task goal, they jointly infer it by observing each other’s movements. In turn, this helps the interactive alignment of their beliefs and behavioral strategies. The second simulation illustrates a "leader-follower" joint action. It shows that when one agent (“leader”) knows the true joint goal, it uses sensorimotor communication to help the other agent (“follower”) infer it, even if doing this requires selecting a more costly individual plan. These simulations illustrate that interactive inference supports successful multi-agent joint actions and reproduces key cognitive and behavioral dynamics of “leaderless” and "leader -follower" joint actions observed in human-human experiments. In sum, interactive inference provides a cognitively inspired, formal framework to realize cooperative joint actions and consensus in multi-agent systems.

Interactive inference: a multi-agent model of cooperative joint actions

Predictive processing has become an influential framework in cognitive sciences. This framework turns the traditional view of perception upside down, claiming that the main flow of information processing is realized in a top-down hierarchical manner. Furthermore, it aims at unifying perception, cognition, and action as a single inferential process. However, in the related literature, the predictive processing framework and its associated schemes such as predictive coding, active inference, perceptual inference, free-energy principle, tend to be used interchangeably. 
In the field of cognitive robotics there is no clear-cut distinction on which schemes have been implemented and under which assumptions. In this paper, working definitions are set with the main aim of analyzing the state of the art in cognitive robotics research working under the predictive processing framework as well as some related non-robotic models. 
The analysis suggests that, first, both research in cognitive robotics implementations and non-robotic models needs to be extended to the study of how multiple exteroceptive modalities can be integrated into prediction error minimization schemes. Second, a relevant distinction found here is that cognitive robotics implementations tend to emphasize the learning of a generative model, while in non-robotics models it is almost absent. Third, despite the relevance for active inference, few cognitive robotics implementations examine the issues around control and whether it should result from the substitution of inverse models with proprioceptive predictions. 
Finally, limited attention has been placed on precision weighting and the tracking of prediction error dynamics. These mechanisms should help to explore more complex behaviors and tasks in cognitive robotics research under the predictive processing framework.

Predictive Processing in Cognitive Robotics: a Review.

We humans are capable of solving challenging planning problems, but the range of adaptive strategies that we use to address them are not yet fully characterized. Here, we designed a series of problem-solving tasks that require planning at different depths. After systematically comparing the performance of participants and AI planners, we found that when facing manageable problems that require planning to a certain number of subgoals (from 1 to 6), participants make an adaptive use of their cognitive resources – namely, they tend to select an initial plan having the minimum required depth, rather than selecting the same depth for all problems. When facing more challenging problems that require planning up to 7 or 8 subgoals, participants tend to select a simpler (greedy) strategy wherein plans consider only the next 1 or 2 subgoals. Furthermore, we found a strong similarity between how different participants solve the same problems. These results support the view of problem solving as a bounded rational process, which adapts costly cognitive resources to task demands. Significance statement Problem-solving usually requires planning ahead for several steps. While previous studies assessed that we can plan multiple steps ahead during problem solving, it is unclear whether we use planning resources parsimoniously, given their significant cognitive costs. Theories of bounded rationality suggest that rather than always operating at our maximum capacity, we should adapt planning depth to task demands. Alternatively, each of us could have a preferred “planning depth” and use the same depth, regardless of the problem. By comparing the behaviour of human and AI planners during problem solving, we found that people adapt planning depth to problem complexity; but resort to simpler strategies when the problem is very hard. Our study reveals a flexible use of bounded cognitive resources during problem solving.

/pdf/adaptive-planning-depth-in-human-problem-solving-s4hm48cx.pdf

Giovanni Pezzulo

Papers

Interactive inference: a multi-agent model of cooperative joint actions

Predictive Processing in Cognitive Robotics: a Review.

Adaptive planning depth in human problem solving

Strategic Task Decomposition in Joint Action.

neuronal and computational principles The why, what, where, when and how of goal-directed choice: