16,639 research outputs found
A Survey on Compiler Autotuning using Machine Learning
Since the mid-1990s, researchers have been trying to use machine-learning
based approaches to solve a number of different compiler optimization problems.
These techniques primarily enhance the quality of the obtained results and,
more importantly, make it feasible to tackle two main compiler optimization
problems: optimization selection (choosing which optimizations to apply) and
phase-ordering (choosing the order of applying optimizations). The compiler
optimization space continues to grow due to the advancement of applications,
increasing number of compiler optimizations, and new target architectures.
Generic optimization passes in compilers cannot fully leverage newly introduced
optimizations and, therefore, cannot keep up with the pace of increasing
options. This survey summarizes and classifies the recent advances in using
machine learning for the compiler optimization field, particularly on the two
major problems of (1) selecting the best optimizations and (2) the
phase-ordering of optimizations. The survey highlights the approaches taken so
far, the obtained results, the fine-grain classification among different
approaches and finally, the influential papers of the field.Comment: version 5.0 (updated on September 2018)- Preprint Version For our
Accepted Journal @ ACM CSUR 2018 (42 pages) - This survey will be updated
quarterly here (Send me your new published papers to be added in the
subsequent version) History: Received November 2016; Revised August 2017;
Revised February 2018; Accepted March 2018
Learning Discriminative Bayesian Networks from High-dimensional Continuous Neuroimaging Data
Due to its causal semantics, Bayesian networks (BN) have been widely employed
to discover the underlying data relationship in exploratory studies, such as
brain research. Despite its success in modeling the probability distribution of
variables, BN is naturally a generative model, which is not necessarily
discriminative. This may cause the ignorance of subtle but critical network
changes that are of investigation values across populations. In this paper, we
propose to improve the discriminative power of BN models for continuous
variables from two different perspectives. This brings two general
discriminative learning frameworks for Gaussian Bayesian networks (GBN). In the
first framework, we employ Fisher kernel to bridge the generative models of GBN
and the discriminative classifiers of SVMs, and convert the GBN parameter
learning to Fisher kernel learning via minimizing a generalization error bound
of SVMs. In the second framework, we employ the max-margin criterion and build
it directly upon GBN models to explicitly optimize the classification
performance of the GBNs. The advantages and disadvantages of the two frameworks
are discussed and experimentally compared. Both of them demonstrate strong
power in learning discriminative parameters of GBNs for neuroimaging based
brain network analysis, as well as maintaining reasonable representation
capacity. The contributions of this paper also include a new Directed Acyclic
Graph (DAG) constraint with theoretical guarantee to ensure the graph validity
of GBN.Comment: 16 pages and 5 figures for the article (excluding appendix
Parallel Implementation of Efficient Search Schemes for the Inference of Cancer Progression Models
The emergence and development of cancer is a consequence of the accumulation
over time of genomic mutations involving a specific set of genes, which
provides the cancer clones with a functional selective advantage. In this work,
we model the order of accumulation of such mutations during the progression,
which eventually leads to the disease, by means of probabilistic graphic
models, i.e., Bayesian Networks (BNs). We investigate how to perform the task
of learning the structure of such BNs, according to experimental evidence,
adopting a global optimization meta-heuristics. In particular, in this work we
rely on Genetic Algorithms, and to strongly reduce the execution time of the
inference -- which can also involve multiple repetitions to collect
statistically significant assessments of the data -- we distribute the
calculations using both multi-threading and a multi-node architecture. The
results show that our approach is characterized by good accuracy and
specificity; we also demonstrate its feasibility, thanks to a 84x reduction of
the overall execution time with respect to a traditional sequential
implementation
Who Learns Better Bayesian Network Structures: Accuracy and Speed of Structure Learning Algorithms
Three classes of algorithms to learn the structure of Bayesian networks from
data are common in the literature: constraint-based algorithms, which use
conditional independence tests to learn the dependence structure of the data;
score-based algorithms, which use goodness-of-fit scores as objective functions
to maximise; and hybrid algorithms that combine both approaches.
Constraint-based and score-based algorithms have been shown to learn the same
structures when conditional independence and goodness of fit are both assessed
using entropy and the topological ordering of the network is known (Cowell,
2001).
In this paper, we investigate how these three classes of algorithms perform
outside the assumptions above in terms of speed and accuracy of network
reconstruction for both discrete and Gaussian Bayesian networks. We approach
this question by recognising that structure learning is defined by the
combination of a statistical criterion and an algorithm that determines how the
criterion is applied to the data. Removing the confounding effect of different
choices for the statistical criterion, we find using both simulated and
real-world complex data that constraint-based algorithms are often less
accurate than score-based algorithms, but are seldom faster (even at large
sample sizes); and that hybrid algorithms are neither faster nor more accurate
than constraint-based algorithms. This suggests that commonly held beliefs on
structure learning in the literature are strongly influenced by the choice of
particular statistical criteria rather than just by the properties of the
algorithms themselves.Comment: 27 pages, 8 figure
- …