NIPS - Not Even Wrong? A Systematic Review of Empirically Complete Demonstrations of Algorithmic Effectiveness in the Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence Literature

Objective: To determine the completeness of argumentative steps necessary to conclude effectiveness of an algorithm in a sample of current ML/AI supervised learning literature. Data Sources: Papers published in the Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS, n\'ee NIPS) journal where the official record showed a 2017 year of publication. Eligibility Criteria: Studies reporting a (semi-)supervised model, or pre-processing fused with (semi-)supervised models for tabular data. Study Appraisal: Three reviewers applied the assessment criteria to determine argumentative completeness. The criteria were split into three groups, including: experiments (e.g real and/or synthetic data), baselines (e.g uninformed and/or state-of-art) and quantitative comparison (e.g. performance quantifiers with confidence intervals and formal comparison of the algorithm against baselines). Results: Of the 121 eligible manuscripts (from the sample of 679 abstracts), 99\% used real-world data and 29\% used synthetic data. 91\% of manuscripts did not report an uninformed baseline and 55\% reported a state-of-art baseline. 32\% reported confidence intervals for performance but none provided references or exposition for how these were calculated. 3\% reported formal comparisons. Limitations: The use of one journal as the primary information source may not be representative of all ML/AI literature. However, the NeurIPS conference is recognised to be amongst the top tier concerning ML/AI studies, so it is reasonable to consider its corpus to be representative of high-quality research. Conclusion: Using the 2017 sample of the NeurIPS supervised learning corpus as an indicator for the quality and trustworthiness of current ML/AI research, it appears that complete argumentative chains in demonstrations of algorithmic effectiveness are rare

Satellite Constellation Pattern Optimization for Complex Regional Coverage

The use of regional coverage satellite constellations is on the rise, urging the need for an optimal constellation design method for complex regional coverage. Traditional constellations are often designed for continuous global coverage, and the few existing regional constellation design methods lead to suboptimal solutions for periodically time-varying or spatially-varying regional coverage requirements. This paper introduces a new general approach to design an optimal constellation pattern that satisfies such complex regional coverage requirements. To this end, the circular convolution nature of the repeating ground track orbit and common ground track constellation is formalized. This formulation enables a scalable constellation pattern analysis for multiple target areas and with multiple sub-constellations. The formalized circular convolution relationship is first used to derive a baseline constellation pattern design method with the conventional assumption of symmetry. Next, a novel method based on binary integer linear programming is developed, which aims to optimally design a constellation pattern with the minimum number of satellites. This binary integer linear programming method is shown to achieve optimal constellation patterns for general problem settings that the baseline method cannot achieve. Five illustrative examples are analyzed to demonstrate the value of the proposed new approach.Comment: 47 pages, 23 figures, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets (Published