Universal neural field computation

Turing machines and G\"odel numbers are important pillars of the theory of computation. Thus, any computational architecture needs to show how it could relate to Turing machines and how stable implementations of Turing computation are possible. In this chapter, we implement universal Turing computation in a neural field environment. To this end, we employ the canonical symbologram representation of a Turing machine obtained from a G\"odel encoding of its symbolic repertoire and generalized shifts. The resulting nonlinear dynamical automaton (NDA) is a piecewise affine-linear map acting on the unit square that is partitioned into rectangular domains. Instead of looking at point dynamics in phase space, we then consider functional dynamics of probability distributions functions (p.d.f.s) over phase space. This is generally described by a Frobenius-Perron integral transformation that can be regarded as a neural field equation over the unit square as feature space of a dynamic field theory (DFT). Solving the Frobenius-Perron equation yields that uniform p.d.f.s with rectangular support are mapped onto uniform p.d.f.s with rectangular support, again. We call the resulting representation \emph{dynamic field automaton}.Comment: 21 pages; 6 figures. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1204.546

Support Vector Machines in R

Being among the most popular and efficient classification and regression methods currently available, implementations of support vector machines exist in almost every popular programming language. Currently four R packages contain SVM related software. The purpose of this paper is to present and compare these implementations.

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