scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Kamal Nigam

Other affiliations: Carnegie Mellon University
Bio: Kamal Nigam is an academic researcher from Google. The author has contributed to research in topics: Naive Bayes classifier & Information extraction. The author has an hindex of 25, co-authored 33 publications receiving 14658 citations. Previous affiliations of Kamal Nigam include Carnegie Mellon University.

Papers
More filters
Proceedings Article
01 Jan 1998
TL;DR: It is found that the multi-variate Bernoulli performs well with small vocabulary sizes, but that the multinomial performs usually performs even better at larger vocabulary sizes--providing on average a 27% reduction in error over the multi -variateBernoulli model at any vocabulary size.
Abstract: Recent work in text classification has used two different first-order probabilistic models for classification, both of which make the naive Bayes assumption. Some use a multi-variate Bernoulli model, that is, a Bayesian Network with no dependencies between words and binary word features (e.g. Larkey and Croft 1996; Koller and Sahami 1997). Others use a multinomial model, that is, a uni-gram language model with integer word counts (e.g. Lewis and Gale 1994; Mitchell 1997). This paper aims to clarify the confusion by describing the differences and details of these two models, and by empirically comparing their classification performance on five text corpora. We find that the multi-variate Bernoulli performs well with small vocabulary sizes, but that the multinomial performs usually performs even better at larger vocabulary sizes--providing on average a 27% reduction in error over the multi-variate Bernoulli model at any vocabulary size.

3,601 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper shows that the accuracy of learned text classifiers can be improved by augmenting a small number of labeled training documents with a large pool of unlabeled documents, and presents two extensions to the algorithm that improve classification accuracy under these conditions.
Abstract: This paper shows that the accuracy of learned text classifiers can be improved by augmenting a small number of labeled training documents with a large pool of unlabeled documents. This is important because in many text classification problems obtaining training labels is expensive, while large quantities of unlabeled documents are readily available. We introduce an algorithm for learning from labeled and unlabeled documents based on the combination of Expectation-Maximization (EM) and a naive Bayes classifier. The algorithm first trains a classifier using the available labeled documents, and probabilistically labels the unlabeled documents. It then trains a new classifier using the labels for all the documents, and iterates to convergence. This basic EM procedure works well when the data conform to the generative assumptions of the model. However these assumptions are often violated in practice, and poor performance can result. We present two extensions to the algorithm that improve classification accuracy under these conditions: (1) a weighting factor to modulate the contribution of the unlabeled data, and (2) the use of multiple mixture components per class. Experimental results, obtained using text from three different real-world tasks, show that the use of unlabeled data reduces classification error by up to 30%.

3,123 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
01 Aug 2000
TL;DR: This work presents a new technique for clustering large datasets, using a cheap, approximate distance measure to eciently divide the data into overlapping subsets the authors call canopies, and presents ex- perimental results on grouping bibliographic citations from the reference sections of research papers.
Abstract: important problems involve clustering large datasets. Although naive implementations of clustering are computa- tionally expensive, there are established ecient techniques for clustering when the dataset has either (1) a limited num- ber of clusters, (2) a low feature dimensionality, or (3) a small number of data points. However, there has been much less work on methods of eciently clustering datasets that are large in all three ways at once|for example, having millions of data points that exist in many thousands of di- mensions representing many thousands of clusters. We present a new technique for clustering these large, high- dimensional datasets. The key idea involves using a cheap, approximate distance measure to eciently divide the data into overlapping subsets we call canopies .T hen cluster- ing is performed by measuring exact distances only between points that occur in a common canopy. Using canopies, large clustering problems that were formerly impossible become practical. Under reasonable assumptions about the cheap distance metric, this reduction in computational cost comes without any loss in clustering accuracy. Canopies can be applied to many domains and used with a variety of cluster- ing approaches, including Greedy Agglomerative Clustering, K-means and Expectation-Maximization. We present ex- perimental results on grouping bibliographic citations from the reference sections of research papers. Here the canopy approach reduces computation time over a traditional clus- tering approach by more than an order of magnitude and decreases error in comparison to a previously used algorithm by 25%.

1,197 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
06 Nov 2000
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that when learning from labeled and unlabeled data, algorithms explicitly leveraging a natural independent split of the features outperform algorithms that do not and may out-perform algorithms not using a split.
Abstract: Recently there has been signi cant interest in supervised learning algorithms that combine labeled and unlabeled data for text learning tasks. The co-training setting [1] applies to datasets that have a natural separation of their features into two disjoint sets. We demonstrate that when learning from labeled and unlabeled data, algorithms explicitly leveraging a natural independent split of the features outperform algorithms that do not. When a natural split does not exist, co-training algorithms that manufacture a feature split may out-perform algorithms not using a split. These results help explain why co-training algorithms are both discriminative in nature and robust to the assumptions of their embedded classi ers.

1,103 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: New research in reinforcement learning, information extraction and text classification that enables efficient spidering, the identification of informative text segments, and the population of topic hierarchies are described.
Abstract: Domain-specific internet portals are growing in popularity because they gather content from the Web and organize it for easy access, retrieval and search. For example, www.campsearch.com allows complex queries by age, location, cost and specialty over summer camps. This functionality is not possible with general, Web-wide search engines. Unfortunately these portals are difficult and time-consuming to maintain. This paper advocates the use of machine learning techniques to greatly automate the creation and maintenance of domain-specific Internet portals. We describe new research in reinforcement learning, information extraction and text classification that enables efficient spidering, the identification of informative text segments, and the population of topic hierarchies. Using these techniques, we have built a demonstration system: a portal for computer science research papers. It already contains over 50,000 papers and is publicly available at www.cora.justresearch.com. These techniques are widely applicable to portal creation in other domains.

1,081 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This work proposes a generative model for text and other collections of discrete data that generalizes or improves on several previous models including naive Bayes/unigram, mixture of unigrams, and Hofmann's aspect model.
Abstract: We describe latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA), a generative probabilistic model for collections of discrete data such as text corpora. LDA is a three-level hierarchical Bayesian model, in which each item of a collection is modeled as a finite mixture over an underlying set of topics. Each topic is, in turn, modeled as an infinite mixture over an underlying set of topic probabilities. In the context of text modeling, the topic probabilities provide an explicit representation of a document. We present efficient approximate inference techniques based on variational methods and an EM algorithm for empirical Bayes parameter estimation. We report results in document modeling, text classification, and collaborative filtering, comparing to a mixture of unigrams model and the probabilistic LSI model.

30,570 citations

Proceedings Article
03 Jan 2001
TL;DR: This paper proposed a generative model for text and other collections of discrete data that generalizes or improves on several previous models including naive Bayes/unigram, mixture of unigrams, and Hof-mann's aspect model, also known as probabilistic latent semantic indexing (pLSI).
Abstract: We propose a generative model for text and other collections of discrete data that generalizes or improves on several previous models including naive Bayes/unigram, mixture of unigrams [6], and Hof-mann's aspect model, also known as probabilistic latent semantic indexing (pLSI) [3]. In the context of text modeling, our model posits that each document is generated as a mixture of topics, where the continuous-valued mixture proportions are distributed as a latent Dirichlet random variable. Inference and learning are carried out efficiently via variational algorithms. We present empirical results on applications of this model to problems in text modeling, collaborative filtering, and text classification.

25,546 citations

Book
25 Oct 1999
TL;DR: This highly anticipated third edition of the most acclaimed work on data mining and machine learning will teach you everything you need to know about preparing inputs, interpreting outputs, evaluating results, and the algorithmic methods at the heart of successful data mining.
Abstract: Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques offers a thorough grounding in machine learning concepts as well as practical advice on applying machine learning tools and techniques in real-world data mining situations. This highly anticipated third edition of the most acclaimed work on data mining and machine learning will teach you everything you need to know about preparing inputs, interpreting outputs, evaluating results, and the algorithmic methods at the heart of successful data mining. Thorough updates reflect the technical changes and modernizations that have taken place in the field since the last edition, including new material on Data Transformations, Ensemble Learning, Massive Data Sets, Multi-instance Learning, plus a new version of the popular Weka machine learning software developed by the authors. Witten, Frank, and Hall include both tried-and-true techniques of today as well as methods at the leading edge of contemporary research. *Provides a thorough grounding in machine learning concepts as well as practical advice on applying the tools and techniques to your data mining projects *Offers concrete tips and techniques for performance improvement that work by transforming the input or output in machine learning methods *Includes downloadable Weka software toolkit, a collection of machine learning algorithms for data mining tasks-in an updated, interactive interface. Algorithms in toolkit cover: data pre-processing, classification, regression, clustering, association rules, visualization

20,196 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The relationship between transfer learning and other related machine learning techniques such as domain adaptation, multitask learning and sample selection bias, as well as covariate shift are discussed.
Abstract: A major assumption in many machine learning and data mining algorithms is that the training and future data must be in the same feature space and have the same distribution. However, in many real-world applications, this assumption may not hold. For example, we sometimes have a classification task in one domain of interest, but we only have sufficient training data in another domain of interest, where the latter data may be in a different feature space or follow a different data distribution. In such cases, knowledge transfer, if done successfully, would greatly improve the performance of learning by avoiding much expensive data-labeling efforts. In recent years, transfer learning has emerged as a new learning framework to address this problem. This survey focuses on categorizing and reviewing the current progress on transfer learning for classification, regression, and clustering problems. In this survey, we discuss the relationship between transfer learning and other related machine learning techniques such as domain adaptation, multitask learning and sample selection bias, as well as covariate shift. We also explore some potential future issues in transfer learning research.

18,616 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Machine learning addresses many of the same research questions as the fields of statistics, data mining, and psychology, but with differences of emphasis.
Abstract: 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.).

13,246 citations