From the Publisher:
Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems is a complete andaccessible account of the theoretical foundations and computational methods that underlie plausible reasoning under uncertainty. The author provides a coherent explication of probability as a language for reasoning with partial belief and offers a unifying perspective on other AI approaches to uncertainty, such as the Dempster-Shafer formalism, truth maintenance systems, and nonmonotonic logic. The author distinguishes syntactic and semantic approaches to uncertaintyand offers techniques, based on belief networks, that provide a mechanism for making semantics-based systems operational. Specifically, network-propagation techniques serve as a mechanism for combining the theoretical coherence of probability theory with modern demands of reasoning-systems technology: modular declarative inputs, conceptually meaningful inferences, and parallel distributed computation. Application areas include diagnosis, forecasting, image interpretation, multi-sensor fusion, decision support systems, plan recognition, planning, speech recognitionin short, almost every task requiring that conclusions be drawn from uncertain clues and incomplete information.
Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems will be of special interest to scholars and researchers in AI, decision theory, statistics, logic, philosophy, cognitive psychology, and the management sciences. Professionals in the areas of knowledge-based systems, operations research, engineering, and statistics will find theoretical and computational tools of immediate practical use. The book can also be used as an excellent text for graduate-level courses in AI, operations research, or applied probability.

Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference

Many areas of science depend on exploratory data analysis and visualization. The need to analyze large amounts of multivariate data raises the fundamental problem of dimensionality reduction: how to discover compact representations of high-dimensional data. Here, we introduce locally linear embedding (LLE), an unsupervised learning algorithm that computes low-dimensional, neighborhood-preserving embeddings of high-dimensional inputs. Unlike clustering methods for local dimensionality reduction, LLE maps its inputs into a single global coordinate system of lower dimensionality, and its optimizations do not involve local minima. By exploiting the local symmetries of linear reconstructions, LLE is able to learn the global structure of nonlinear manifolds, such as those generated by images of faces or documents of text.

/pdf/nonlinear-dimensionality-reduction-by-locally-linear-vmiazg4oee.pdf

Nonlinear dimensionality reduction by locally linear embedding.

From the Publisher:
With this text, you gain an understanding of the fundamental concepts of algorithms, the very heart of computer science. It introduces the basic data structures and programming techniques often used in efficient algorithms. Covers use of lists, push-down stacks, queues, trees, and graphs. Later chapters go into sorting, searching and graphing algorithms, the string-matching algorithms, and the Schonhage-Strassen integer-multiplication algorithm. Provides numerous graded exercises at the end of each chapter.


0201000296B04062001

The Design and Analysis of Computer Algorithms

The modern science of networks has brought significant advances to our understanding of complex systems. One of the most relevant features of graphs representing real systems is community structure, or clustering, i. e. the organization of vertices in clusters, with many edges joining vertices of the same cluster and comparatively few edges joining vertices of different clusters. Such clusters, or communities, can be considered as fairly independent compartments of a graph, playing a similar role like, e. g., the tissues or the organs in the human body. Detecting communities is of great importance in sociology, biology and computer science, disciplines where systems are often represented as graphs. This problem is very hard and not yet satisfactorily solved, despite the huge effort of a large interdisciplinary community of scientists working on it over the past few years. We will attempt a thorough exposition of the topic, from the definition of the main elements of the problem, to the presentation of most methods developed, with a special focus on techniques designed by statistical physicists, from the discussion of crucial issues like the significance of clustering and how methods should be tested and compared against each other, to the description of applications to real networks.

/pdf/community-detection-in-graphs-34rogm3r6p.pdf

Community detection in graphs

The problem of finding dominators in a directed graph has many important applications, notably in global optimization of computer code. Although linear and near-linear-time algorithms exist, they use sophisticated data structures. We develop an algorithm for finding dominators that uses only a "static tree" disjoint set data structure in addition to simple lists and maps. The algorithm runs in near-linear or linear time, depending on the implementation of the disjoint set data structure. We give several versions of the algorithm, including one that computes loop nesting information (needed in many kinds of global code optimization) and that can be made self-certifying, so that the correctness of the computed dominators is very easy to verify.

Finding Dominators via Disjoint Set Union

The Fibonacci heap is a classic data structure that supports deletions in logarithmic amortized time and all other heap operations in O(1) amortized time. We explore the design space of this data structure. We propose a version with the following improvements over the original: (i) Each heap is represented by a single heap-ordered tree, instead of a set of trees. (ii) Each decrease-key operation does only one cut and a cascade of rank changes, instead of doing a cascade of cuts. (iii) The outcomes of all comparisons done by the algorithm are explicitly represented in the data structure, so none are wasted. We also give an example to show that without cascading cuts or rank changes, both the original data structure and the new version fail to have the desired efficiency, solving an open problem of Fredman. Finally, we illustrate the richness of the design space by proposing several alternative ways to do cascading rank changes, including a randomized strategy related to one previously proposed by Karger. We leave the analysis of these alternatives as intriguing open problems.

Fibonacci Heaps Revisited

The problem of finding the coarsest partition of a set S with respect to another partition of S and one or more functions on S has several applications, one of which is the state minimization of finite state automata. In 1971 Hopcroft presented an algorithm to solve the many function coarsest partition problem for sets of n elements in O(n log n) time and O(n) space. Aho, Hopcroft, and Ullman later presented an algorithm that solves the special case of this problem for only one function. Both these algorithms use a negative strategy that repeatedly refines the original partition until a solution is found. We present a new algorithm to solve the single function coarsest partition problem in O(n) time and space using a different, constructive approach.

A Linear Time Algorithm to Solve the Single Function Coarsest Partition Problem

We present an O(log d + log logm/n n)-time randomized PRAM algorithm for computing the connected components of an n-vertex, m-edge undirected graph with maximum component diameter d. The algorithm runs on an ARBITRARY CRCW (concurrent-read, concurrent-write with arbitrary write resolution) PRAM using O(m) processors. The time bound holds with good probability. Our algorithm is based on the breakthrough results of Andoni et al. [FOCS'18] and Behnezhad et al. [FOCS'19]. Their algorithms run on the more powerful MPC model and rely on sorting and computing prefix sums in O(1) time, tasks that take Ω(log n / log log n) time on a CRCW PRAM with poly(n) processors. Our simpler algorithm uses limited-collision hashing and does not sort or do prefix sums. It matches the time and space bounds of the algorithm of Behnezhad et al., who improved the time bound of Andoni et al. It is widely believed that the larger private memory per processor and unbounded local computation of the MPC model admit algorithms faster than that on a PRAM. Our result suggests that such additional power might not be necessary, at least for fundamental graph problems like connected components and spanning forest.

Connected Components on a PRAM in Log Diameter Time

We have presented algorithms for verification and sensitivity analysis of minimum spanning trees. Both algorithms are optimal; however, the exact bound on the number of processors for deterministic sensitivity analysis is not known. This leaves the obvious open question from the Dixon, Rauch and Tarjan paper: “What is the best bound on the number of comparisons needed to perform sensitivity analysis?” The algorithms given here are for the CREW PRAM model. Can these algorithms be transformed into an EREW algorithm?

Robert E. Tarjan

Papers

Finding Dominators via Disjoint Set Union

Fibonacci Heaps Revisited

A Linear Time Algorithm to Solve the Single Function Coarsest Partition Problem

Connected Components on a PRAM in Log Diameter Time

Optimal parallel verification of minimum spanning trees in logarithmic time