39 research outputs found

    Supermartingales in Prediction with Expert Advice

    Get PDF

    Prediction with Expert Advice under Discounted Loss

    Full text link
    We study prediction with expert advice in the setting where the losses are accumulated with some discounting---the impact of old losses may gradually vanish. We generalize the Aggregating Algorithm and the Aggregating Algorithm for Regression to this case, propose a suitable new variant of exponential weights algorithm, and prove respective loss bounds.Comment: 26 pages; expanded (2 remarks -> theorems), some misprints correcte

    Cascading Randomized Weighted Majority: A New Online Ensemble Learning Algorithm

    Full text link
    With the increasing volume of data in the world, the best approach for learning from this data is to exploit an online learning algorithm. Online ensemble methods are online algorithms which take advantage of an ensemble of classifiers to predict labels of data. Prediction with expert advice is a well-studied problem in the online ensemble learning literature. The Weighted Majority algorithm and the randomized weighted majority (RWM) are the most well-known solutions to this problem, aiming to converge to the best expert. Since among some expert, the best one does not necessarily have the minimum error in all regions of data space, defining specific regions and converging to the best expert in each of these regions will lead to a better result. In this paper, we aim to resolve this defect of RWM algorithms by proposing a novel online ensemble algorithm to the problem of prediction with expert advice. We propose a cascading version of RWM to achieve not only better experimental results but also a better error bound for sufficiently large datasets.Comment: 15 pages, 3 figure

    A Second-order Bound with Excess Losses

    Get PDF
    We study online aggregation of the predictions of experts, and first show new second-order regret bounds in the standard setting, which are obtained via a version of the Prod algorithm (and also a version of the polynomially weighted average algorithm) with multiple learning rates. These bounds are in terms of excess losses, the differences between the instantaneous losses suffered by the algorithm and the ones of a given expert. We then demonstrate the interest of these bounds in the context of experts that report their confidences as a number in the interval [0,1] using a generic reduction to the standard setting. We conclude by two other applications in the standard setting, which improve the known bounds in case of small excess losses and show a bounded regret against i.i.d. sequences of losses

    Four Facets of Forecast Felicity: Calibration, Predictiveness, Randomness and Regret

    Full text link
    Machine learning is about forecasting. Forecasts, however, obtain their usefulness only through their evaluation. Machine learning has traditionally focused on types of losses and their corresponding regret. Currently, the machine learning community regained interest in calibration. In this work, we show the conceptual equivalence of calibration and regret in evaluating forecasts. We frame the evaluation problem as a game between a forecaster, a gambler and nature. Putting intuitive restrictions on gambler and forecaster, calibration and regret naturally fall out of the framework. In addition, this game links evaluation of forecasts to randomness of outcomes. Random outcomes with respect to forecasts are equivalent to good forecasts with respect to outcomes. We call those dual aspects, calibration and regret, predictiveness and randomness, the four facets of forecast felicity
    corecore