Results 1  10
of
324
A DecisionTheoretic Generalization of onLine Learning and an Application to Boosting
, 1996
"... ..."
A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers
 PROCEEDINGS OF THE 5TH ANNUAL ACM WORKSHOP ON COMPUTATIONAL LEARNING THEORY
, 1992
"... A training algorithm that maximizes the margin between the training patterns and the decision boundary is presented. The technique is applicable to a wide variety of classifiaction functions, including Perceptrons, polynomials, and Radial Basis Functions. The effective number of parameters is adjust ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1332 (44 self)
 Add to MetaCart
A training algorithm that maximizes the margin between the training patterns and the decision boundary is presented. The technique is applicable to a wide variety of classifiaction functions, including Perceptrons, polynomials, and Radial Basis Functions. The effective number of parameters is adjusted automatically to match the complexity of the problem. The solution is expressed as a linear combination of supporting patterns. These are the subset of training patterns that are closest to the decision boundary. Bounds on the generalization performance based on the leaveoneout method and the VCdimension are given. Experimental results on optical character recognition problems demonstrate the good generalization obtained when compared with other learning algorithms.
Boosting the margin: A new explanation for the effectiveness of voting methods
 In Proceedings International Conference on Machine Learning
, 1997
"... Abstract. One of the surprising recurring phenomena observed in experiments with boosting is that the test error of the generated classifier usually does not increase as its size becomes very large, and often is observed to decrease even after the training error reaches zero. In this paper, we show ..."
Abstract

Cited by 733 (52 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. One of the surprising recurring phenomena observed in experiments with boosting is that the test error of the generated classifier usually does not increase as its size becomes very large, and often is observed to decrease even after the training error reaches zero. In this paper, we show that this phenomenon is related to the distribution of margins of the training examples with respect to the generated voting classification rule, where the margin of an example is simply the difference between the number of correct votes and the maximum number of votes received by any incorrect label. We show that techniques used in the analysis of Vapnik’s support vector classifiers and of neural networks with small weights can be applied to voting methods to relate the margin distribution to the test error. We also show theoretically and experimentally that boosting is especially effective at increasing the margins of the training examples. Finally, we compare our explanation to those based on the biasvariance decomposition. 1
Improved Boosting Algorithms Using Confidencerated Predictions
 MACHINE LEARNING
, 1999
"... We describe several improvements to Freund and Schapire’s AdaBoost boosting algorithm, particularly in a setting in which hypotheses may assign confidences to each of their predictions. We give a simplified analysis of AdaBoost in this setting, and we show how this analysis can be used to find impr ..."
Abstract

Cited by 705 (26 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We describe several improvements to Freund and Schapire’s AdaBoost boosting algorithm, particularly in a setting in which hypotheses may assign confidences to each of their predictions. We give a simplified analysis of AdaBoost in this setting, and we show how this analysis can be used to find improved parameter settings as well as a refined criterion for training weak hypotheses. We give a specific method for assigning confidences to the predictions of decision trees, a method closely related to one used by Quinlan. This method also suggests a technique for growing decision trees which turns out to be identical to one proposed by Kearns and Mansour. We focus next on how to apply the new boosting algorithms to multiclass classification problems, particularly to the multilabel case in which each example may belong to more than one class. We give two boosting methods for this problem, plus a third method based on output coding. One of these leads to a new method for handling the singlelabel case which is simpler but as effective as techniques suggested by Freund and Schapire. Finally, we give some experimental results comparing a few of the algorithms discussed in this paper.
Multitask Learning
 MACHINE LEARNING
, 1997
"... Multitask Learning is an approach to inductive transfer that improves generalization by using the domain information contained in the training signals of related tasks as an inductive bias. It does this by learning tasks in parallel while using a shared representation; what is learned for each task ..."
Abstract

Cited by 481 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Multitask Learning is an approach to inductive transfer that improves generalization by using the domain information contained in the training signals of related tasks as an inductive bias. It does this by learning tasks in parallel while using a shared representation; what is learned for each task can help other tasks be learned better. This paper reviews prior work on MTL, presents new evidence that MTL in backprop nets discovers task relatedness without the need of supervisory signals, and presents new results for MTL with knearest neighbor and kernel regression. In this paper we demonstrate multitask learning in three domains. We explain how multitask learning works, and show that there are many opportunities for multitask learning in real domains. We present an algorithm and results for multitask learning with casebased methods like knearest neighbor and kernel regression, and sketch an algorithm for multitask learning in decision trees. Because multitask learning works, can be applied to many different kinds of domains, and can be used with different learning algorithms, we conjecture there will be many opportunities for its use on realworld problems.
Improving generalization with active learning
 Machine Learning
, 1994
"... Abstract. Active learning differs from "learning from examples " in that the learning algorithm assumes at least some control over what part of the input domain it receives information about. In some situations, active learning is provably more powerful than learning from examples ..."
Abstract

Cited by 422 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Active learning differs from &quot;learning from examples &quot; in that the learning algorithm assumes at least some control over what part of the input domain it receives information about. In some situations, active learning is provably more powerful than learning from examples alone, giving better generalization for a fixed number of training examples. In this article, we consider the problem of learning a binary concept in the absence of noise. We describe a formalism for active concept learning called selective sampling and show how it may be approximately implemented by a neural network. In selective sampling, a learner receives distribution information from the environment and queries an oracle on parts of the domain it considers &quot;useful. &quot; We test our implementation, called an SGnetwork, on three domains and observe significant improvement in generalization.
The Boosting Approach to Machine Learning: An Overview
, 2002
"... Boosting is a general method for improving the accuracy of any given learning algorithm. Focusing primarily on the AdaBoost algorithm, this chapter overviews some of the recent work on boosting including analyses of AdaBoost's training error and generalization error; boosting's connecti ..."
Abstract

Cited by 325 (15 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Boosting is a general method for improving the accuracy of any given learning algorithm. Focusing primarily on the AdaBoost algorithm, this chapter overviews some of the recent work on boosting including analyses of AdaBoost's training error and generalization error; boosting's connection to game theory and linear programming; the relationship between boosting and logistic regression; extensions of AdaBoost for multiclass classification problems; methods of incorporating human knowledge into boosting; and experimental and applied work using boosting.
Regularization Theory and Neural Networks Architectures
 Neural Computation
, 1995
"... We had previously shown that regularization principles lead to approximation schemes which are equivalent to networks with one layer of hidden units, called Regularization Networks. In particular, standard smoothness functionals lead to a subclass of regularization networks, the well known Radial Ba ..."
Abstract

Cited by 317 (31 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We had previously shown that regularization principles lead to approximation schemes which are equivalent to networks with one layer of hidden units, called Regularization Networks. In particular, standard smoothness functionals lead to a subclass of regularization networks, the well known Radial Basis Functions approximation schemes. This paper shows that regularization networks encompass a much broader range of approximation schemes, including many of the popular general additive models and some of the neural networks. In particular, we introduce new classes of smoothness functionals that lead to different classes of basis functions. Additive splines as well as some tensor product splines can be obtained from appropriate classes of smoothness functionals. Furthermore, the same generalization that extends Radial Basis Functions (RBF) to Hyper Basis Functions (HBF) also leads from additive models to ridge approximation models, containing as special cases Breiman's hinge functions, som...
Training a 3Node Neural Network is NPComplete
, 1992
"... We consider a 2layer, 3node, ninput neural network whose nodes compute linear threshold functions of their inputs. We show that it is NPcomplete to decide whether there exist weights and thresholds for this network so that it produces output consistent with a given set of training examples. We ..."
Abstract

Cited by 204 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We consider a 2layer, 3node, ninput neural network whose nodes compute linear threshold functions of their inputs. We show that it is NPcomplete to decide whether there exist weights and thresholds for this network so that it produces output consistent with a given set of training examples. We extend the result to other simple networks. We also present a network for which training is hard but where switching to a more powerful representation makes training easier. These results suggest that those looking for perfect training algorithms cannot escape inherent computational difficulties just by considering only simple or very regular networks. They also suggest the importance, given a training problem, of finding an appropriate network and input encoding for that problem. It is left as an open problem to extend our result to nodes with nonlinear functions such as sigmoids.