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 Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques

/pdf/convex-analysisnoer-san-nojin-zhan-nituite-5dl2rbmoyr.pdf

Convex Analysisの二,三の進展について

The key idea behind active learning is that a machine learning algorithm can achieve greater accuracy with fewer training labels if it is allowed to choose the data from which it learns. An active learner may pose queries, usually in the form of unlabeled data instances to be labeled by an oracle (e.g., a human annotator). Active learning is well-motivated in many modern machine learning problems, where unlabeled data may be abundant or easily obtained, but labels are difficult, time-consuming, or expensive to obtain. This report provides a general introduction to active learning and a survey of the literature. This includes a discussion of the scenarios in which queries can be formulated, and an overview of the query strategy frameworks proposed in the literature to date. An analysis of the empirical and theoretical evidence for successful active learning, a summary of problem setting variants and practical issues, and a discussion of related topics in machine learning research are also presented.

Active Learning Literature Survey

Social Network Analysis

A genetic algorithm (GA) is a robust problem-solving method based on natural selection. Hardware's speed advantage and its ability to parallelize offer great rewards to genetic algorithms. Speedups of 1-3 orders of magnitude have been observed when frequently used software routines were implemented in hardware by way of reprogrammable field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). Reprogrammability is essential in a general-purpose GA engine because certain GA modules require changeability (e.g. the function to be optimized by the GA). Thus a hardware-based GA is both feasible and desirable. A fully functional hardware-based genetic algorithm (the HGA) is presented here as a proof-of-concept system. It was designed using VHDL to allow for easy scalability. It is designed to act as a coprocessor with the CPU of a PC. The user programs the FPGAs which implement the function to be optimized. Other GA parameters may also be specified by the user. Simulation results and performance analyses of the HGA are presented. A prototype HGA is described and compared to a similar GA implemented in software. In the simple tests, the prototype took about 6% as many clock cycles to run as the software-based GA. Further suggested improvements could realistically make the HGA 2–3 orders of magnitude faster than the software-based GA.

/pdf/hga-a-hardware-based-genetic-algorithm-4da6zrktgv.pdf

HGA: A Hardware-Based Genetic Algorithm

Active machine learning algorithms are used when large numbers of unlabeled examples are available and getting labels for them is costly (e.g. requiring consulting a human expert). Many conventional active learning algorithms focus on refining the decision boundary, at the expense of exploring new regions that the current hypothesis misclassifies. We propose a new active learning algorithm that balances such exploration with refining of the decision boundary by dynamically adjusting the probability to explore at each step. Our experimental results demonstrate improved performance on data sets that require extensive exploration while remaining competitive on data sets that do not. Our algorithm also shows significant tolerance of noise.

/pdf/balancing-exploration-and-exploitation-a-new-algorithm-for-3tn8hsoumc.pdf

Balancing exploration and exploitation: a new algorithm for active machine learning

The multiple-instance learning (MIL) model has been very successful in application areas such as drug discovery and content-based image-retrieval. Recently, a generalization of this model and an algorithm for this generalization were introduced, showing significant advantages over the conventional MIL model in certain application areas. Unfortunately, this algorithm is inherently inefficient, preventing scaling to high dimensions. We reformulate this algorithm using a kernel for a support vector machine, reducing its time complexity from exponential to polynomial. Computing the kernel is equivalent to counting the number of axis-parallel boxes in a discrete, bounded space that contain at least one point from each of two multisets P and Q. We show that this problem is #P-complete, but then give a fully polynomial randomized approximation scheme (FPRAS) for it. Finally, we empirically evaluate our kernel.

SVM-based generalized multiple-instance learning via approximate box counting

Mid- to late-season weeds that escape from the routine early-season weed management threaten agricultural production by creating a large number of seeds for several future growing seasons. Rapid and accurate detection of weed patches in field is the first step of site-specific weed management. In this study, object detection-based convolutional neural network models were trained and evaluated over low-altitude unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) imagery for mid- to late-season weed detection in soybean fields. The performance of two object detection models, Faster RCNN and the Single Shot Detector (SSD), were evaluated and compared in terms of weed detection performance using mean Intersection over Union (IoU) and inference speed. It was found that the Faster RCNN model with 200 box proposals had similar good weed detection performance to the SSD model in terms of precision, recall, f1 score, and IoU, as well as a similar inference time. The precision, recall, f1 score and IoU were 0.65, 0.68, 0.66 and 0.85 for Faster RCNN with 200 proposals, and 0.66, 0.68, 0.67 and 0.84 for SSD, respectively. However, the optimal confidence threshold of the SSD model was found to be much lower than that of the Faster RCNN model, which indicated that SSD might have lower generalization performance than Faster RCNN for mid- to late-season weed detection in soybean fields using UAV imagery. The performance of the object detection model was also compared with patch-based CNN model. The Faster RCNN model yielded a better weed detection performance than the patch-based CNN with and without overlap. The inference time of Faster RCNN was similar to patch-based CNN without overlap, but significantly less than patch-based CNN with overlap. Hence, Faster RCNN was found to be the best model in terms of weed detection performance and inference time among the different models compared in this study. This work is important in understanding the potential and identifying the algorithms for an on-farm, near real-time weed detection and management.

/pdf/comparison-of-object-detection-and-patch-based-4srgjfbx63.pdf

Comparison of Object Detection and Patch-Based Classification Deep Learning Models on Mid- to Late-Season Weed Detection in UAV Imagery

We study an on-line problem that is motivated by the networking problem of dynamically adjusting of acknowledgments in the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP). We provide a theoretical model for this problem in which the goal is to send acks at a time that minimize a linear combination of the cost for the number of acknowledgments sent and the cost for the additional latency introduced by delaying acknowledgments. To study the usefulness of applying packet arrival time prediction to this problem, we assume there is an oracle that provides the algorithm with the times of the next L arrivals, for some L ≥ 0.We give two different objective functions for measuring the cost of a solution, each with its own measure of latency cost. For each objective function we first give an O(n2)-time dynamic programming algorithm for optimally solving the off-line problem. Then we describe an on-line algorithm that greedily acknowledges exactly when the cost for an acknowledgment is less than the latency cost incurred by not acknowledging. We show that for this algorithm there is a sequence of n packet arrivals for which it is O (***)-competitive for the first objective function, 2-competitive for the second function for L = 0, and 1-competitivefor the second function for L = 1. Next we present a second on-line algorithm which is a slight modification of the first, and we prove that it is 2-competitive for both objective functions for all L. We also give lower bounds on the competitive ratio for any deterministic on-line algorithm. These results show that for each objective function, at least one of our algorithms is optimal.Finally, we give some initial empirical results using arrival sequences from real network traffic where we compare the two methods used in TCP for acknowledgment delay with our two on-line algorithms. In all cases we examine performance with L = 0 and L = 1.

Stephen D. Scott

Papers

HGA: A Hardware-Based Genetic Algorithm

Balancing exploration and exploitation: a new algorithm for active machine learning

SVM-based generalized multiple-instance learning via approximate box counting

Comparison of Object Detection and Patch-Based Classification Deep Learning Models on Mid- to Late-Season Weed Detection in UAV Imagery

On-line analysis of the TCP acknowledgment delay problem