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

Probability Distributions.- Linear Models for Regression.- Linear Models for Classification.- Neural Networks.- Kernel Methods.- Sparse Kernel Machines.- Graphical Models.- Mixture Models and EM.- Approximate Inference.- Sampling Methods.- Continuous Latent Variables.- Sequential Data.- Combining Models.

Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning

Data Mining - Concepts and Techniques.

The proliferation of mobile computing devices and local-area wireless networks has fostered a growing interest in location-aware systems and services. In this paper we present RADAR, a radio-frequency (RF)-based system for locating and tracking users inside buildings. RADAR operates by recording and processing signal strength information at multiple base stations positioned to provide overlapping coverage in the area of interest. It combines empirical measurements with signal propagation modeling to determine user location and thereby enable location-aware services and applications. We present experimental results that demonstrate the ability of RADAR to estimate user location with a high degree of accuracy.

/pdf/radar-an-in-building-rf-based-user-location-and-tracking-ow0on2sogt.pdf

RADAR: an in-building RF-based user location and tracking system

This paper presents the top 10 data mining algorithms identified by the IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM) in December 2006: C4.5, k-Means, SVM, Apriori, EM, PageRank, AdaBoost, kNN, Naive Bayes, and CART. These top 10 algorithms are among the most influential data mining algorithms in the research community. With each algorithm, we provide a description of the algorithm, discuss the impact of the algorithm, and review current and further research on the algorithm. These 10 algorithms cover classification, clustering, statistical learning, association analysis, and link mining, which are all among the most important topics in data mining research and development.

/pdf/top-10-algorithms-in-data-mining-70qtv03lc6.pdf

Top 10 algorithms in data mining

Classification is one of the basic tasks of data mining in modern database applications including molecular biology, astronomy, mechanical engineering, medical imaging or meteorology The underlying models have to consider spatial properties such as shape or extension as well as thematic attributes We introduce 3D shape histograms as an intuitive and powerful similarity model for 3D objects Particular flexibility is provided by using quadratic form distance functions in order to account for errors of measurement, sampling, and numerical rounding that all may result in small displacements and rotations of shapes For query processing, a general filter-refinement architecture is employed that efficiently supports similarity search based on quadratic forms An experimental evaluation in the context of molecular biology demonstrates both, the high classification accuracy of more than 90% and the good performance of the approach

/pdf/3d-shape-histograms-for-similarity-search-and-classification-3ufx4o0gs9.pdf

3D Shape Histograms for Similarity Search and Classification in Spatial Databases

For an increasing number of modern database applications, efficient support of similarity search becomes an important task. Along with the complexity of the objects such as images, molecules and mechanical parts, also the complexity of the similarity models increases more and more. Whereas algorithms that are directly based on indexes work well for simple medium-dimensional similarity distance functions, they do not meet the efficiency requirements of complex high-dimensional and adaptable distance functions. The use of a multi-step query processing strategy is recommended in these cases, and our investigations substantiate that the number of candidates which are produced in the filter step and exactly evaluated in the refinement step is a fundamental efficiency parameter. After revealing the strong performance shortcomings of the state-of-the-art algorithm for k-nearest neighbor search [Korn et al. 1996], we present a novel multi-step algorithm which is guaranteed to produce the minimum number of candidates. Experimental evaluations demonstrate the significant performance gain over the previous solution, and we observed average improvement factors of up to 120 for the number of candidates and up to 48 for the total runtime.

/pdf/optimal-multi-step-k-nearest-neighbor-search-232sunutgy.pdf

Optimal multi-step k-nearest neighbor search

Clustering high dimensional data is an emerging research field. Subspace clustering or projected clustering group similar objects in subspaces, i.e. projections, of the full space. In the past decade, several clustering paradigms have been developed in parallel, without thorough evaluation and comparison between these paradigms on a common basis.Conclusive evaluation and comparison is challenged by three major issues. First, there is no ground truth that describes the "true" clusters in real world data. Second, a large variety of evaluation measures have been used that reflect different aspects of the clustering result. Finally, in typical publications authors have limited their analysis to their favored paradigm only, while paying other paradigms little or no attention.In this paper, we take a systematic approach to evaluate the major paradigms in a common framework. We study representative clustering algorithms to characterize the different aspects of each paradigm and give a detailed comparison of their properties. We provide a benchmark set of results on a large variety of real world and synthetic data sets. Using different evaluation measures, we broaden the scope of the experimental analysis and create a common baseline for future developments and comparable evaluations in the field. For repeatability, all implementations, data sets and evaluation measures are available on our website.

/pdf/evaluating-clustering-in-subspace-projections-of-high-55900jux43.pdf

Evaluating clustering in subspace projections of high dimensional data

Clustering streaming data requires algorithms that are capable of updating clustering results for the incoming data. As data is constantly arriving, time for processing is limited. Clustering has to be performed in a single pass over the incoming data and within the possibly varying inter-arrival times of the stream. Likewise, memory is limited, making it impossible to store all data. For clustering, we are faced with the challenge of maintaining a current result that can be presented to the user at any given time. In this work, we propose a parameter-free algorithm that automatically adapts to the speed of the data stream. It makes best use of the time available under the current constraints to provide a clustering of the objects seen up to that point. Our approach incorporates the age of the objects to reflect the greater importance of more recent data. For efficient and effective handling, we introduce the ClusTree, a compact and self-adaptive index structure for maintaining stream summaries. Additionally we present solutions to handle very fast streams through aggregation mechanisms and propose novel descent strategies that improve the clustering result on slower streams as long as time permits. Our experiments show that our approach is capable of handling a multitude of different stream characteristics for accurate and scalable anytime stream clustering.

The ClusTree: indexing micro-clusters for anytime stream mining

Massive Online Analysis (MOA) is a software environment for implementing algorithms and running experiments for online learning from evolving data streams. MOA is designed to deal with the challenging problem of scaling up the implementation of state of the art algorithms to real world dataset sizes. It contains collection of oine and online for both classication

/pdf/moa-massive-online-analysis-a-framework-for-stream-2344o38o7x.pdf

Thomas Seidl

Papers

3D Shape Histograms for Similarity Search and Classification in Spatial Databases

Optimal multi-step k-nearest neighbor search

Evaluating clustering in subspace projections of high dimensional data

The ClusTree: indexing micro-clusters for anytime stream mining

MOA: Massive Online Analysis, a framework for stream classification and clustering.