Results 1  10
of
45
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 1277 (43 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.
Nonlinear component analysis as a kernel eigenvalue problem

, 1996
"... We describe a new method for performing a nonlinear form of Principal Component Analysis. By the use of integral operator kernel functions, we can efficiently compute principal components in highdimensional feature spaces, related to input space by some nonlinear map; for instance the space of all ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1044 (72 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We describe a new method for performing a nonlinear form of Principal Component Analysis. By the use of integral operator kernel functions, we can efficiently compute principal components in highdimensional feature spaces, related to input space by some nonlinear map; for instance the space of all possible 5pixel products in 16x16 images. We give the derivation of the method, along with a discussion of other techniques which can be made nonlinear with the kernel approach; and present first experimental results on nonlinear feature extraction for pattern recognition.
A tutorial on support vector regression
, 2004
"... In this tutorial we give an overview of the basic ideas underlying Support Vector (SV) machines for function estimation. Furthermore, we include a summary of currently used algorithms for training SV machines, covering both the quadratic (or convex) programming part and advanced methods for dealing ..."
Abstract

Cited by 470 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this tutorial we give an overview of the basic ideas underlying Support Vector (SV) machines for function estimation. Furthermore, we include a summary of currently used algorithms for training SV machines, covering both the quadratic (or convex) programming part and advanced methods for dealing with large datasets. Finally, we mention some modifications and extensions that have been applied to the standard SV algorithm, and discuss the aspect of regularization from a SV perspective.
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 309 (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...
Regularization networks and support vector machines
 Advances in Computational Mathematics
, 2000
"... Regularization Networks and Support Vector Machines are techniques for solving certain problems of learning from examples – in particular the regression problem of approximating a multivariate function from sparse data. Radial Basis Functions, for example, are a special case of both regularization a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 266 (33 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Regularization Networks and Support Vector Machines are techniques for solving certain problems of learning from examples – in particular the regression problem of approximating a multivariate function from sparse data. Radial Basis Functions, for example, are a special case of both regularization and Support Vector Machines. We review both formulations in the context of Vapnik’s theory of statistical learning which provides a general foundation for the learning problem, combining functional analysis and statistics. The emphasis is on regression: classification is treated as a special case.
Generalized Discriminant Analysis Using a Kernel Approach
, 2000
"... We present a new method that we call Generalized Discriminant Analysis (GDA) to deal with nonlinear discriminant analysis using kernel function operator. The underlying theory is close to the Support Vector Machines (SVM) insofar as the GDA method provides a mapping of the input vectors into high di ..."
Abstract

Cited by 216 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a new method that we call Generalized Discriminant Analysis (GDA) to deal with nonlinear discriminant analysis using kernel function operator. The underlying theory is close to the Support Vector Machines (SVM) insofar as the GDA method provides a mapping of the input vectors into high dimensional feature space. In the transformed space, linear properties make it easy to extend and generalize the classical Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) to non linear discriminant analysis. The formulation is expressed as an eigenvalue problem resolution. Using a different kernel, one can cover a wide class of nonlinearities. For both simulated data and alternate kernels, we give classification results as well as the shape of the separating function. The results are confirmed using a real data to perform seed classification. 1. Introduction Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) is a traditional statistical method which has proven successful on classification problems [Fukunaga, 1990]. The p...
A Theory of Networks for Approximation and Learning
 Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
, 1989
"... Learning an inputoutput mapping from a set of examples, of the type that many neural networks have been constructed to perform, can be regarded as synthesizing an approximation of a multidimensional function, that is solving the problem of hypersurface reconstruction. From this point of view, t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 194 (24 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Learning an inputoutput mapping from a set of examples, of the type that many neural networks have been constructed to perform, can be regarded as synthesizing an approximation of a multidimensional function, that is solving the problem of hypersurface reconstruction. From this point of view, this form of learning is closely related to classical approximation techniques, such as generalized splines and regularization theory. This paper considers the problems of an exact representation and, in more detail, of the approximation of linear and nonlinear mappings in terms of simpler functions of fewer variables. Kolmogorov's theorem concerning the representation of functions of several variables in terms of functions of one variable turns out to be almost irrelevant in the context of networks for learning. Wedevelop a theoretical framework for approximation based on regularization techniques that leads to a class of threelayer networks that we call Generalized Radial Basis Functions (GRBF), since they are mathematically related to the wellknown Radial Basis Functions, mainly used for strict interpolation tasks. GRBF networks are not only equivalent to generalized splines, but are also closely related to pattern recognition methods suchasParzen windows and potential functions and to several neural network algorithms, suchas Kanerva's associative memory,backpropagation and Kohonen's topology preserving map. They also haveaninteresting interpretation in terms of prototypes that are synthesized and optimally combined during the learning stage. The paper introduces several extensions and applications of the technique and discusses intriguing analogies with neurobiological data.
On the Influence of the Kernel on the Consistency of Support Vector Machines
 Journal of Machine Learning Research
, 2001
"... In this article we study the generalization abilities of several classifiers of support vector machine (SVM) type using a certain class of kernels that we call universal. It is shown that the soft margin algorithms with universal kernels are consistent for a large class of classification problems ..."
Abstract

Cited by 158 (20 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this article we study the generalization abilities of several classifiers of support vector machine (SVM) type using a certain class of kernels that we call universal. It is shown that the soft margin algorithms with universal kernels are consistent for a large class of classification problems including some kind of noisy tasks provided that the regularization parameter is chosen well. In particular we derive a simple su#cient condition for this parameter in the case of Gaussian RBF kernels. On the one hand our considerations are based on an investigation of an approximation propertythe socalled universalityof the used kernels that ensures that all continuous functions can be approximated by certain kernel expressions. This approximation property also gives a new insight into the role of kernels in these and other algorithms. On the other hand the results are achieved by a precise study of the underlying optimization problems of the classifiers. Furthermore, we show consistency for the maximal margin classifier as well as for the soft margin SVM's in the presence of large margins. In this case it turns out that also constant regularization parameters ensure consistency for the soft margin SVM's. Finally we prove that even for simple, noise free classification problems SVM's with polynomial kernels can behave arbitrarily badly.
The Connection between Regularization Operators and Support Vector Kernels
, 1998
"... In this paper a correspondence is derived between regularization operators used in Regularization Networks and Support Vector Kernels. We prove that the Green's Functions associated with regularization operators are suitable Support Vector Kernels with equivalent regularization properties. Moreover ..."
Abstract

Cited by 146 (43 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper a correspondence is derived between regularization operators used in Regularization Networks and Support Vector Kernels. We prove that the Green's Functions associated with regularization operators are suitable Support Vector Kernels with equivalent regularization properties. Moreover the paper provides an analysis of currently used Support Vector Kernels in the view of regularization theory and corresponding operators associated with the classes of both polynomial kernels and translation invariant kernels. The latter are also analyzed on periodical domains. As a byproduct we show that a large number of Radial Basis Functions, namely conditionally positive definite functions, may be used as Support Vector kernels.
A unified framework for Regularization Networks and Support Vector Machines
, 1999
"... This report describers research done at the Center for Biological & Computational Learning and the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This research was sponsored by theN ational Science Foundation under contractN o. IIS9800032, the O#ce ofN aval Researc ..."
Abstract

Cited by 50 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This report describers research done at the Center for Biological & Computational Learning and the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This research was sponsored by theN ational Science Foundation under contractN o. IIS9800032, the O#ce ofN aval Research under contractN o.N 0001493 10385 and contractN o.N 000149510600. Partial support was also provided by DaimlerBenz AG, Eastman Kodak, Siemens Corporate Research, Inc., ATR and AT&T. Contents Introductic 3 2 OverviF of stati.48EF learni4 theory 5 2.1 Unifo6 Co vergence and the VapnikChervo nenkis bo und ............. 7 2.2 The metho d o Structural Risk Minimizatio ..................... 10 2.3 #unifo8 co vergence and the V # ..................... 10 2.4 Overviewo fo urappro6 h ............................... 13 3 Reproduci9 Kernel HiT ert Spaces: a briL overviE 14 4RegulariEqq.L Networks 16 4.1 Radial Basis Functio8 ................................. 19 4.2 Regularizatioz generalized splines and kernel smo oxy rs .............. 20 4.3 Dual representatio o f Regularizatio Netwo rks ................... 21 4.4 Fro regressioto 5 Support vector machiT9 22 5.1 SVMin RKHS ..................................... 22 5.2 Fro regressioto 6SRMforRNsandSVMs 26 6.1 SRMfo SVMClassificatio .............................. 28 6.1.1 Distributio dependent bo undsfo SVMC .................. 29 7 A BayesiL Interpretatiq ofRegulariTFqEL and SRM? 30 7.1 Maximum A Po terio6 Interpretatio o f ............... 30 7.2 Bayesian interpretatio o f the stabilizer in the RN andSVMfunctio6I6 ...... 32 7.3 Bayesian interpretatio o f the data term in the Regularizatio andSVMfunctioy8 33 7.4 Why a MAP interpretatio may be misleading .................... 33 Connectine between SVMs and Sparse Ap...