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

http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:710518/FULLTEXT02

A review of unsupervised feature learning and deep learning for time-series modeling ☆

https://romisatriawahono.net/lecture/rm/survey/machine%20learning/Wozniak%20-%20Multiple%20Classifier%20Systems%20-%202014.pdf

A survey of multiple classifier systems as hybrid systems

A privacy preserving association rule mining algorithm was introducedThis algorithm preserved privacy of individual values by computing scalar productMeanwhile the algorithm of computing scalar product was given and the security was analyzed

Privacy preserving association rule mining in vertically partitioned data

The use of clustering methods for the discovery of cancer subtypes has drawn a great deal of attention in the scientific community. While bioinformaticians have proposed new clustering methods that take advantage of characteristics of the gene expression data, the medical community has a preference for using "classic" clustering methods. There have been no studies thus far performing a large-scale evaluation of different clustering methods in this context. We present the first large-scale analysis of seven different clustering methods and four proximity measures for the analysis of 35 cancer gene expression data sets. Our results reveal that the finite mixture of Gaussians, followed closely by k-means, exhibited the best performance in terms of recovering the true structure of the data sets. These methods also exhibited, on average, the smallest difference between the actual number of classes in the data sets and the best number of clusters as indicated by our validation criteria. Furthermore, hierarchical methods, which have been widely used by the medical community, exhibited a poorer recovery performance than that of the other methods evaluated. Moreover, as a stable basis for the assessment and comparison of different clustering methods for cancer gene expression data, this study provides a common group of data sets (benchmark data sets) to be shared among researchers and used for comparisons with new methods. The data sets analyzed in this study are available at http://algorithmics.molgen.mpg.de/Supplements/CompCancer/
 .

/pdf/clustering-cancer-gene-expression-data-a-comparative-study-36v3qby0gm.pdf

Clustering cancer gene expression data: a comparative study

We present a novel framework that applies a meta-learning approach to clustering algorithms. Given a dataset, our meta-learning approach provides a ranking for the candidate algorithms that could be used with that dataset. This ranking could, among other things, support non-expert users in the algorithm selection task. In order to evaluate the framework proposed, we implement a prototype that employs regression support vector machines as the meta-learner. Our case study is developed in the context of cancer gene expression micro-array datasets.

https://www.cin.ufpe.br/~igcf/preprint/deSouto2008a.pdf

Ranking and selecting clustering algorithms using a meta-learning approach

Ensemble of classifiers is an effective way of improving performance of individual classifiers. However, the task of selecting the ensemble members is often a non-trivial one. For example, in some cases, a bad selection strategy could lead to ensembles with no performance improvement. Thus, many researchers have put a lot of effort in finding an effective method for selecting classifier for building ensembles. In this context, a dynamic classifier selection (DCS) method is proposed, which takes into account both the accuracy and the diversity of the classifiers.

Using Accuracy and Diversity to Select Classifiers to Build Ensembles

Normalization before clustering is often needed for proximity indices, such as Euclidian distance, which are sensitive to differences in the magnitude or scales of the attributes. The goal is to equalize the size or magnitude and the variability of these features. This can also be seen as a way to adjust the relative weighting of the attributes. In this context, we present a first large scale data driven comparative study of three normalization procedures applied to cancer gene expression data. The results are presented in terms of the recovering of the true cluster structure as found by five different clustering algorithms.

/pdf/comparative-study-on-normalization-procedures-for-cluster-8ryui45ffn.pdf

Comparative study on normalization procedures for cluster analysis of gene expression datasets

Shows results of using simulated annealing for optimizing neural network architectures and weights. The algorithm generates networks with good generalization performance (mean classification error of 5.28%) and low complexity (mean number of connections of 11.68 out of 36) for an odor recognition task in an artificial nose.

Optimization of neural network weights and architectures for odor recognition using simulated annealing

A pattern recognition system for an artificial nose is presented. It is composed of artificial neural networks with time delay taps on their inputs. For the classification of vintages of wine, it achieves better results (mean classification error of 4.32%) than those obtained by networks without delay taps (42.79%).

M.C.P. de Souto

Papers

Ranking and selecting clustering algorithms using a meta-learning approach

Using Accuracy and Diversity to Select Classifiers to Build Ensembles

Comparative study on normalization procedures for cluster analysis of gene expression datasets

Optimization of neural network weights and architectures for odor recognition using simulated annealing

Classification of vintages of wine by artificial nose using time delay neural networks