Clustering ensemble has emerged as a powerful tool for improving both the robustness and the stability of results from individual clustering methods. Weighted clustering ensemble arises naturally from clustering ensemble. One of the arguments for weighted clustering ensemble is that elements (clusterings or clusters) in a clustering ensemble are of different quality, or that objects or features are of varying significance. However, it is not possible to directly apply the weighting mechanisms from classification (supervised) domain to clustering (unsupervised) domain, also because clustering is inherently an ill-posed problem. This paper provides an overview of weighted clustering ensemble by discussing different types of weights, major approaches to determining weight values, and applications of weighted clustering ensemble to complex data. The unifying framework presented in this paper will help clustering practitioners select the most appropriate weighting mechanisms for their own problems.

It's important to keep up with indusctry - subscribe! to stay ahead Thank you, you've been subscribed. The two areas of Artificial Intelligence, namely machine learning and deep learning, raise more questions than an entire field combined, mainly because these two areas are often mixed up and used interchangeably when referring to statistical modeling of data; however, the techniques used in each are different and you need to understand the distinctions between these data modeling paradigms in order to refer to them by their corresponding name. In this article, we'll explain the definitions of artificial intelligence, machine learning, deep learning, and neural networks, briefly overview each of those categories, explain how they work, and finish with an explicit comparison of machine learning vs deep learning. Artificial Intelligence (hereafter referred to as AI) is the intelligence demonstrated by machines as opposed to the natural intelligence of humans. AI can be further classified into three different systems: analytical, human-inspired, and humanized artificial intelligence.

We've been doing research on these issues for some time and it became really clear about a year ago that there was a significant need for some kind of committee-based oversight related to data and information ethics,

According to a new market study entitled "Artificial Intelligence in Aviation Market to 2027 – Global Analysis and Forecasts by Deployment Type (On-Premise and Cloud) and Industry Vertical (BFSI, Healthcare & Life Sciences, Retail & Consumer Goods, Manufacturing, Travel & Hospitality, IT & Telecommunication, Media & Entertainment, and Others) and Geography, "explains the report, explaining the key drivers of this growth and highlighting key market players and their evolution. The report factors this growth and also highlights the major players in the market and their developments. Growing urbanization has resulted in advent of several disruptive technologies including the artificial intelligence. The AI has become integrated fragment of almost the sectors and recently the technology has also taken a plunge into aviation sector. Autopilot and flight management system are some of the key areas of implementation of the AI in aviation industry.

Because of high dimensionality, correlation among covariates, and noise contained in data, dimension reduction (DR) techniques are often employed to the application of machine learning algorithms. Principal Component Analysis (PCA), Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA), and their kernel variants (KPCA, KLDA) are among the most popular DR methods. Recently, Supervised Kernel Principal Component Analysis (SKPCA) has been shown as another successful alternative. In this paper, brief reviews of these popular techniques are presented first. We then conduct a comparative performance study based on three simulated datasets, after which the performance of the techniques are evaluated through application to a pattern recognition problem in face image analysis. The gender classification problem is considered on MORPH-II and FG-NET, two popular longitudinal face aging databases. Several feature extraction methods are used, including biologically-inspired features (BIF), local binary patterns (LBP), histogram of oriented gradients (HOG), and the Active Appearance Model (AAM). After applications of DR methods, a linear support vector machine (SVM) is deployed with gender classification accuracy rates exceeding 95% on MORPH-II, competitive with benchmark results. A parallel computational approach is also proposed, attaining faster processing speeds and similar recognition rates on MORPH-II. Our computational approach can be applied to practical gender classification systems and generalized to other face analysis tasks, such as race classification and age prediction.

The last time I wrote about artificial intelligence (AI) in the insurance industry was in 2017. I discussed the spectacular possibilities of intelligent automated interactions, personalized service for complex issues, and new distribution channels. Looking back on the article, I feel some of the same optimism I expressed two years ago -- but I also see my naiveté at the time. In some ways, the promise of machine learning appears even more spectacular today. We've seen remarkable achievements in game playing in systems like AlphaZero and AlphaStar, realistic pictures of people "imagined" by generative adversarial networks, and the image processing power of driverless cars and trucks.

The scale of Internet-connected systems has increased considerably, and these systems are being exposed to cyberattacks more than ever. The complexity and dynamics of cyberattacks require protecting mechanisms to be responsive, adaptive, and large-scale. Machine learning, or more specifically DRL, methods have been proposed widely to address these issues. By incorporating deep learning into traditional RL, DRL is highly capable of solving complex, dynamic, and especially high-dimensional cyber defense problems. This paper presents a survey of DRL approaches developed for cyber security.

On Wednesday, Sens. Ron Wyden and Cory Booker and Rep. Yvette Clarke introduced the Algorithmic Accountability Act, indicating policymakers' increasing concern that artificial intelligence is magnifying human bias in tools such as facial recognition, self-driving cars, customer service, marketing, and content moderation. While A.I. has incredible potential to improve our lives, the truth is that it is only capable of reflecting our societal problems right back at us. And because of that, we can't trust it to make important decisions that are susceptible to human prejudice. Even the most enlightened of humans have deep-seated biases. Difficult to identify, they are even harder to correct.

Spiking neural networks (SNNs) are distributed trainable systems whose computing elements, or neurons, are characterized by internal analog dynamics and by digital and sparse synaptic communications. The sparsity of the synaptic spiking inputs and the corresponding event-driven nature of neural processing can be leveraged by energy-efficient hardware implementations, which can offer significant energy reductions as compared to conventional artificial neural networks (ANNs). The design of training algorithms lags behind the hardware implementations. Most existing training algorithms for SNNs have been designed either for biological plausibility or through conversion from pretrained ANNs via rate encoding. This article provides an introduction to SNNs by focusing on a probabilistic signal processing methodology that enables the direct derivation of learning rules by leveraging the unique time-encoding capabilities of SNNs. We adopt discrete-time probabilistic models for networked spiking neurons and derive supervised and unsupervised learning rules from first principles via variational inference. Examples and open research problems are also provided.

Classifiers are among the most widely used supervised machine learning algorithms. Many classification models exist, and choosing the right one for a given task is difficult. During model selection and debugging, data scientists need to asses classifier performance, evaluate the training behavior over time, and compare different models. Typically, this analysis is based on single-number performance measures such as accuracy. A more detailed evaluation of classifiers is possible by inspecting class errors. The confusion matrix is an established way for visualizing these class errors, but it was not designed with temporal or comparative analysis in mind. More generally, established performance analysis systems do not allow a combined temporal and comparative analysis of class-level information. To address this issue, we propose ConfusionFlow, an interactive, comparative visualization tool that combines the benefits of class confusion matrices with the visualization of performance characteristics over time. ConfusionFlow is model-agnostic and can be used to compare performances for different model types, model architectures, and/or training and test datasets. We demonstrate the usefulness of ConfusionFlow in the context of two practical problems: an analysis of the influence of network pruning on model errors, and a case study on instance selection strategies in active learning.