There is, I think, something ethereal about i —the square root of minus one. I remember first hearing about it at school. It seemed an odd beast at that time—an intruder hovering on the edge of reality.

Usually familiarity dulls this sense of the bizarre, but in the case of i it was the reverse: over the years the sense of its surreal nature intensified. It seemed that it was impossible to write mathematics that described the real world in …

I and i

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

Data Mining - Concepts and Techniques.

Detecting anomalies in data is a vital task, with numerous high-impact applications in areas such as security, finance, health care, and law enforcement. While numerous techniques have been developed in past years for spotting outliers and anomalies in unstructured collections of multi-dimensional points, with graph data becoming ubiquitous, techniques for structured graph data have been of focus recently. As objects in graphs have long-range correlations, a suite of novel technology has been developed for anomaly detection in graph data. This survey aims to provide a general, comprehensive, and structured overview of the state-of-the-art methods for anomaly detection in data represented as graphs. As a key contribution, we give a general framework for the algorithms categorized under various settings: unsupervised versus (semi-)supervised approaches, for static versus dynamic graphs, for attributed versus plain graphs. We highlight the effectiveness, scalability, generality, and robustness aspects of the methods. What is more, we stress the importance of anomaly attribution and highlight the major techniques that facilitate digging out the root cause, or the `why', of the detected anomalies for further analysis and sense-making. Finally, we present several real-world applications of graph-based anomaly detection in diverse domains, including financial, auction, computer traffic, and social networks. We conclude our survey with a discussion on open theoretical and practical challenges in the field.

http://www3.cs.stonybrook.edu/~leman/pubs/14-dami-graphanomalysurvey.pdf

Graph based anomaly detection and description: a survey

On Hyperparameter Optimization of Machine Learning Algorithms: Theory and Practice

To meet the challenge of processing rapidly growing graph and network data created by modern applications, a number of distributed graph processing systems have emerged, such as Pregel and GraphLab. All these systems divide input graphs into partitions, and employ a "think like a vertex" programming model to support iterative graph computation. This vertex-centric model is easy to program and has been proved useful for many graph algorithms. However, this model hides the partitioning information from the users, thus prevents many algorithm-specific optimizations. This often results in longer execution time due to excessive network messages (e.g. in Pregel) or heavy scheduling overhead to ensure data consistency (e.g. in GraphLab). To address this limitation, we propose a new "think like a graph" programming paradigm. Under this graph-centric model, the partition structure is opened up to the users, and can be utilized so that communication within a partition can bypass the heavy message passing or scheduling machinery. We implemented this model in a new system, called Giraph++, based on Apache Giraph, an open source implementation of Pregel. We explore the applicability of the graph-centric model to three categories of graph algorithms, and demonstrate its flexibility and superior performance, especially on well-partitioned data. For example, on a web graph with 118 million vertices and 855 million edges, the graph-centric version of connected component detection algorithm runs 63X faster and uses 204X fewer network messages than its vertex-centric counterpart.

/pdf/from-think-like-a-vertex-to-think-like-a-graph-3bw3yh5jy1.pdf

From "think like a vertex" to "think like a graph"

MapReduce is emerging as a generic parallel programming paradigm for large clusters of machines. This trend combined with the growing need to run machine learning (ML) algorithms on massive datasets has led to an increased interest in implementing ML algorithms on MapReduce. However, the cost of implementing a large class of ML algorithms as low-level MapReduce jobs on varying data and machine cluster sizes can be prohibitive. In this paper, we propose SystemML in which ML algorithms are expressed in a higher-level language and are compiled and executed in a MapReduce environment. This higher-level language exposes several constructs including linear algebra primitives that constitute key building blocks for a broad class of supervised and unsupervised ML algorithms. The algorithms expressed in SystemML are compiled and optimized into a set of MapReduce jobs that can run on a cluster of machines. We describe and empirically evaluate a number of optimization strategies for efficiently executing these algorithms on Hadoop, an open-source MapReduce implementation. We report an extensive performance evaluation on three ML algorithms on varying data and cluster sizes.

/pdf/systemml-declarative-machine-learning-on-mapreduce-5a965b1n7c.pdf

SystemML: Declarative machine learning on MapReduce

The rising need for custom machine learning (ML) algorithms and the growing data sizes that require the exploitation of distributed, data-parallel frameworks such as MapReduce or Spark, pose significant productivity challenges to data scientists. Apache SystemML addresses these challenges through declarative ML by (1) increasing the productivity of data scientists as they are able to express custom algorithms in a familiar domain-specific language covering linear algebra primitives and statistical functions, and (2) transparently running these ML algorithms on distributed, data-parallel frameworks by applying cost-based compilation techniques to generate efficient, low-level execution plans with in-memory single-node and large-scale distributed operations. This paper describes SystemML on Apache Spark, end to end, including insights into various optimizer and runtime techniques as well as performance characteristics. We also share lessons learned from porting SystemML to Spark and declarative ML in general. Finally, SystemML is open-source, which allows the database community to leverage it as a testbed for further research.

/pdf/systemml-declarative-machine-learning-on-spark-4j9e26fssg.pdf

SystemML: declarative machine learning on spark

SystemML aims at declarative, large-scale machine learning (ML) on top of MapReduce, where high-level ML scripts with R-like syntax are compiled to programs of MR jobs. The declarative specification of ML algorithms enables---in contrast to existing large-scale machine learning libraries---automatic optimization. SystemML's primary focus is on data parallelism but many ML algorithms inherently exhibit opportunities for task parallelism as well. A major challenge is how to efficiently combine both types of parallelism for arbitrary ML scripts and workloads. In this paper, we present a systematic approach for combining task and data parallelism for large-scale machine learning on top of MapReduce. We employ a generic Parallel FOR construct (ParFOR) as known from high performance computing (HPC). Our core contributions are (1) complementary parallelization strategies for exploiting multi-core and cluster parallelism, as well as (2) a novel cost-based optimization framework for automatically creating optimal parallel execution plans. Experiments on a variety of use cases showed that this achieves both efficiency and scalability due to automatic adaptation to ad-hoc workloads and unknown data characteristics.

/pdf/hybrid-parallelization-strategies-for-large-scale-machine-1hngu90xa0.pdf

Hybrid parallelization strategies for large-scale machine learning in SystemML

Systems and methods for processing Machine Learning (ML) algorithms in a MapReduce environment are described. In one embodiment of a method, the method includes receiving a ML algorithm to be executed in the MapReduce environment. The method further includes parsing the ML algorithm into a plurality of statement blocks in a sequence, wherein each statement block comprises a plurality of basic operations (hops). The method also includes automatically determining an execution plan for each statement block, wherein at least one of the execution plans comprises one or more low-level operations (lops). The method further includes implementing the execution plans in the sequence of the plurality of the statement blocks.

Shirish Tatikonda

Papers

From "think like a vertex" to "think like a graph"

SystemML: Declarative machine learning on MapReduce

SystemML: declarative machine learning on spark

Hybrid parallelization strategies for large-scale machine learning in SystemML

Systems and methods for processing machine learning algorithms in a MapReduce environment