1,151 research outputs found

    A review of multi-instance learning assumptions

    Get PDF
    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

    General supervision via probabilistic transformations

    Get PDF
    Different types of training data have led to numerous schemes for supervised classification. Current learning techniques are tailored to one specific scheme and cannot handle general ensembles of training samples. This paper presents a unifying framework for supervised classification with general ensembles of training samples, and proposes the learning methodology of generalized robust risk minimization (GRRM). The paper shows how current and novel supervision schemes can be addressed under the proposed framework by representing the relationship between examples at prediction and training via probabilistic transformations. The results show that GRRM can handle different types of training samples in a unified manner, and enable new supervision schemes that aggregate general ensembles of training samples.RYC-2016-1938

    InfoGAN: Interpretable Representation Learning by Information Maximizing Generative Adversarial Nets

    Full text link
    This paper describes InfoGAN, an information-theoretic extension to the Generative Adversarial Network that is able to learn disentangled representations in a completely unsupervised manner. InfoGAN is a generative adversarial network that also maximizes the mutual information between a small subset of the latent variables and the observation. We derive a lower bound to the mutual information objective that can be optimized efficiently, and show that our training procedure can be interpreted as a variation of the Wake-Sleep algorithm. Specifically, InfoGAN successfully disentangles writing styles from digit shapes on the MNIST dataset, pose from lighting of 3D rendered images, and background digits from the central digit on the SVHN dataset. It also discovers visual concepts that include hair styles, presence/absence of eyeglasses, and emotions on the CelebA face dataset. Experiments show that InfoGAN learns interpretable representations that are competitive with representations learned by existing fully supervised methods

    A review of domain adaptation without target labels

    Full text link
    Domain adaptation has become a prominent problem setting in machine learning and related fields. This review asks the question: how can a classifier learn from a source domain and generalize to a target domain? We present a categorization of approaches, divided into, what we refer to as, sample-based, feature-based and inference-based methods. Sample-based methods focus on weighting individual observations during training based on their importance to the target domain. Feature-based methods revolve around on mapping, projecting and representing features such that a source classifier performs well on the target domain and inference-based methods incorporate adaptation into the parameter estimation procedure, for instance through constraints on the optimization procedure. Additionally, we review a number of conditions that allow for formulating bounds on the cross-domain generalization error. Our categorization highlights recurring ideas and raises questions important to further research.Comment: 20 pages, 5 figure

    A Comparison of Multi-instance Learning Algorithms

    Get PDF
    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
    corecore