Multi-View Active Learning in the Non-Realizable Case

The sample complexity of active learning under the realizability assumption has been well-studied. The realizability assumption, however, rarely holds in practice. In this paper, we theoretically characterize the sample complexity of active learning in the non-realizable case under multi-view setting. We prove that, with unbounded Tsybakov noise, the sample complexity of multi-view active learning can be $\widetilde{O}(\log\frac{1}{\epsilon})$, contrasting to single-view setting where the polynomial improvement is the best possible achievement. We also prove that in general multi-view setting the sample complexity of active learning with unbounded Tsybakov noise is $\widetilde{O}(\frac{1}{\epsilon})$, where the order of $1/\epsilon$ is independent of the parameter in Tsybakov noise, contrasting to previous polynomial bounds where the order of $1/\epsilon$ is related to the parameter in Tsybakov noise.Comment: 22 pages, 1 figur

A Comparison of Multi-instance Learning Algorithms

Motivated by various challenging real-world applications, such as drug activity prediction and image retrieval, multi-instance (MI) learning has attracted considerable interest in recent years. Compared with standard supervised learning, the MI learning task is more difficult as the label information of each training example is incomplete. Many MI algorithms have been proposed. Some of them are specifically designed for MI problems whereas others have been upgraded or adapted from standard single-instance learning algorithms. Most algorithms have been evaluated on only one or two benchmark datasets, and there is a lack of systematic comparisons of MI learning algorithms. This thesis presents a comprehensive study of MI learning algorithms that aims to compare their performance and find a suitable way to properly address different MI problems. First, it briefly reviews the history of research on MI learning. Then it discusses five general classes of MI approaches that cover a total of 16 MI algorithms. After that, it presents empirical results for these algorithms that were obtained from 15 datasets which involve five different real-world application domains. Finally, some conclusions are drawn from these results: (1) applying suitable standard single-instance learners to MI problems can often generate the best result on the datasets that were tested, (2) algorithms exploiting the standard asymmetric MI assumption do not show significant advantages over approaches using the so-called collective assumption, and (3) different MI approaches are suitable for different application domains, and no MI algorithm works best on all MI problems

Bag-Level Aggregation for Multiple Instance Active Learning in Instance Classification Problems

A growing number of applications, e.g. video surveillance and medical image analysis, require training recognition systems from large amounts of weakly annotated data while some targeted interactions with a domain expert are allowed to improve the training process. In such cases, active learning (AL) can reduce labeling costs for training a classifier by querying the expert to provide the labels of most informative instances. This paper focuses on AL methods for instance classification problems in multiple instance learning (MIL), where data is arranged into sets, called bags, that are weakly labeled. Most AL methods focus on single instance learning problems. These methods are not suitable for MIL problems because they cannot account for the bag structure of data. In this paper, new methods for bag-level aggregation of instance informativeness are proposed for multiple instance active learning (MIAL). The \textit{aggregated informativeness} method identifies the most informative instances based on classifier uncertainty, and queries bags incorporating the most information. The other proposed method, called \textit{cluster-based aggregative sampling}, clusters data hierarchically in the instance space. The informativeness of instances is assessed by considering bag labels, inferred instance labels, and the proportion of labels that remain to be discovered in clusters. Both proposed methods significantly outperform reference methods in extensive experiments using benchmark data from several application domains. Results indicate that using an appropriate strategy to address MIAL problems yields a significant reduction in the number of queries needed to achieve the same level of performance as single instance AL methods

Co-regularized Alignment for Unsupervised Domain Adaptation

Deep neural networks, trained with large amount of labeled data, can fail to generalize well when tested with examples from a \emph{target domain} whose distribution differs from the training data distribution, referred as the \emph{source domain}. It can be expensive or even infeasible to obtain required amount of labeled data in all possible domains. Unsupervised domain adaptation sets out to address this problem, aiming to learn a good predictive model for the target domain using labeled examples from the source domain but only unlabeled examples from the target domain. Domain alignment approaches this problem by matching the source and target feature distributions, and has been used as a key component in many state-of-the-art domain adaptation methods. However, matching the marginal feature distributions does not guarantee that the corresponding class conditional distributions will be aligned across the two domains. We propose co-regularized domain alignment for unsupervised domain adaptation, which constructs multiple diverse feature spaces and aligns source and target distributions in each of them individually, while encouraging that alignments agree with each other with regard to the class predictions on the unlabeled target examples. The proposed method is generic and can be used to improve any domain adaptation method which uses domain alignment. We instantiate it in the context of a recent state-of-the-art method and observe that it provides significant performance improvements on several domain adaptation benchmarks.Comment: NIPS 2018 accepted versio

A Very Brief Introduction to Machine Learning With Applications to Communication Systems

Given the unprecedented availability of data and computing resources, there is widespread renewed interest in applying data-driven machine learning methods to problems for which the development of conventional engineering solutions is challenged by modelling or algorithmic deficiencies. This tutorial-style paper starts by addressing the questions of why and when such techniques can be useful. It then provides a high-level introduction to the basics of supervised and unsupervised learning. For both supervised and unsupervised learning, exemplifying applications to communication networks are discussed by distinguishing tasks carried out at the edge and at the cloud segments of the network at different layers of the protocol stack

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