A review of multi-instance learning assumptions

Multi-instance (MI) learning is a variant of inductive machine learning, where each learning example contains a bag of instances instead of a single feature vector. The term commonly refers to the supervised setting, where each bag is associated with a label. This type of representation is a natural fit for a number of real-world learning scenarios, including drug activity prediction and image classification, hence many MI learning algorithms have been proposed. Any MI learning method must relate instances to bag-level class labels, but many types of relationships between instances and class labels are possible. Although all early work in MI learning assumes a specific MI concept class known to be appropriate for a drug activity prediction domain; this ‘standard MI assumption’ is not guaranteed to hold in other domains. Much of the recent work in MI learning has concentrated on a relaxed view of the MI problem, where the standard MI assumption is dropped, and alternative assumptions are considered instead. However, often it is not clearly stated what particular assumption is used and how it relates to other assumptions that have been proposed. In this paper, we aim to clarify the use of alternative MI assumptions by reviewing the work done in this area

A critical assessment of imbalanced class distribution problem: the case of predicting freshmen student attrition

Predicting student attrition is an intriguing yet challenging problem for any academic institution. Class-imbalanced data is a common in the field of student retention, mainly because a lot of students register but fewer students drop out. Classification techniques for imbalanced dataset can yield deceivingly high prediction accuracy where the overall predictive accuracy is usually driven by the majority class at the expense of having very poor performance on the crucial minority class. In this study, we compared different data balancing techniques to improve the predictive accuracy in minority class while maintaining satisfactory overall classification performance. Specifically, we tested three balancing techniques—oversampling, under-sampling and synthetic minority over-sampling (SMOTE)—along with four popular classification methods—logistic regression, decision trees, neuron networks and support vector machines. We used a large and feature rich institutional student data (between the years 2005 and 2011) to assess the efficacy of both balancing techniques as well as prediction methods. The results indicated that the support vector machine combined with SMOTE data-balancing technique achieved the best classification performance with a 90.24% overall accuracy on the 10-fold holdout sample. All three data-balancing techniques improved the prediction accuracy for the minority class. Applying sensitivity analyses on developed models, we also identified the most important variables for accurate prediction of student attrition. Application of these models has the potential to accurately predict at-risk students and help reduce student dropout rates

Solving for multi-class using orthogonal coding matrices

A common method of generalizing binary to multi-class classification is the error correcting code (ECC). ECCs may be optimized in a number of ways, for instance by making them orthogonal. Here we test two types of orthogonal ECCs on seven different datasets using three types of binary classifier and compare them with three other multi-class methods: 1 vs. 1, one-versus-the-rest and random ECCs. The first type of orthogonal ECC, in which the codes contain no zeros, admits a fast and simple method of solving for the probabilities. Orthogonal ECCs are always more accurate than random ECCs as predicted by recent literature. Improvments in uncertainty coefficient (U.C.) range between 0.4--17.5% (0.004--0.139, absolute), while improvements in Brier score between 0.7--10.7%. Unfortunately, orthogonal ECCs are rarely more accurate than 1 vs. 1. Disparities are worst when the methods are paired with logistic regression, with orthogonal ECCs never beating 1 vs. 1. When the methods are paired with SVM, the losses are less significant, peaking at 1.5%, relative, 0.011 absolute in uncertainty coefficient and 6.5% in Brier scores. Orthogonal ECCs are always the fastest of the five multi-class methods when paired with linear classifiers. When paired with a piecewise linear classifier, whose classification speed does not depend on the number of training samples, classifications using orthogonal ECCs were always more accurate than the the remaining three methods and also faster than 1 vs. 1. Losses against 1 vs. 1 here were higher, peaking at 1.9% (0.017, absolute), in U.C. and 39% in Brier score. Gains in speed ranged between 1.1% and over 100%. Whether the speed increase is worth the penalty in accuracy will depend on the application

A Taxonomy of Big Data for Optimal Predictive Machine Learning and Data Mining

Big data comes in various ways, types, shapes, forms and sizes. Indeed, almost all areas of science, technology, medicine, public health, economics, business, linguistics and social science are bombarded by ever increasing flows of data begging to analyzed efficiently and effectively. In this paper, we propose a rough idea of a possible taxonomy of big data, along with some of the most commonly used tools for handling each particular category of bigness. The dimensionality p of the input space and the sample size n are usually the main ingredients in the characterization of data bigness. The specific statistical machine learning technique used to handle a particular big data set will depend on which category it falls in within the bigness taxonomy. Large p small n data sets for instance require a different set of tools from the large n small p variety. Among other tools, we discuss Preprocessing, Standardization, Imputation, Projection, Regularization, Penalization, Compression, Reduction, Selection, Kernelization, Hybridization, Parallelization, Aggregation, Randomization, Replication, Sequentialization. Indeed, it is important to emphasize right away that the so-called no free lunch theorem applies here, in the sense that there is no universally superior method that outperforms all other methods on all categories of bigness. It is also important to stress the fact that simplicity in the sense of Ockham's razor non plurality principle of parsimony tends to reign supreme when it comes to massive data. We conclude with a comparison of the predictive performance of some of the most commonly used methods on a few data sets.Comment: 18 pages, 2 figures 3 table

Machine Learning and Integrative Analysis of Biomedical Big Data.

Recent developments in high-throughput technologies have accelerated the accumulation of massive amounts of omics data from multiple sources: genome, epigenome, transcriptome, proteome, metabolome, etc. Traditionally, data from each source (e.g., genome) is analyzed in isolation using statistical and machine learning (ML) methods. Integrative analysis of multi-omics and clinical data is key to new biomedical discoveries and advancements in precision medicine. However, data integration poses new computational challenges as well as exacerbates the ones associated with single-omics studies. Specialized computational approaches are required to effectively and efficiently perform integrative analysis of biomedical data acquired from diverse modalities. In this review, we discuss state-of-the-art ML-based approaches for tackling five specific computational challenges associated with integrative analysis: curse of dimensionality, data heterogeneity, missing data, class imbalance and scalability issues