We introduce a semi-supervised support vector machine (S3yM) method. Given a training set of labeled data and a working set of unlabeled data, S3YM constructs a support vector machine using both the training and working sets. We use S3 YM to solve the transduction problem using overall risk minimization (ORM) posed by Yapnik. The transduction problem is to estimate the value of a classification function at the given points in the working set. This contrasts with the standard inductive learning problem of estimating the classification function at all possible values and then using the fixed function to deduce the classes of the working set data.

Calculation of Q(t) and R(t) using (4, 5, 7, 9) to execute the path average and the average over sets is relatively straightforward, albeit tedious. We find that -"Yt(l -"Yt)

We introduce a semi-supervised support vector machine (S3yM) method. Given a training set of labeled data and a working set of unlabeled data, S3YM constructs a support vector machine using both the training and working sets. We use S3 YM to solve the transduction problem using overall risk minimization (ORM) posed by Yapnik. The transduction problem is to estimate the value of a classification function at the given points in the working set. This contrasts with the standard inductive learning problem of estimating the classification function at all possible values and then using the fixed function to deduce the classes of the working set data.

Calculation of Q(t) and R(t) using (4, 5, 7, 9) to execute the path average and the average over sets is relatively straightforward, albeit tedious. We find that -"Yt(l -"Yt)

We introduce a semi-supervised support vector machine (S3yM) method. Given a training set of labeled data and a working set of unlabeled data, S3YM constructs a support vector machine using boththe training and working sets. We use S3 YM to solve the transduction problem using overall risk minimization (ORM) posed by Yapnik. The transduction problem is to estimate the value of a classification function at the given points in the working set. This contrasts with the standard inductive learning problem of estimating the classification function at all possible values and then using the fixed function to deduce the classes of the working set data.

Calculation of Q(t) and R(t) using (4, 5, 7, 9) to execute the path average and the average over sets is relatively straightforward, albeit tedious. We find that -"Yt(l -"Yt)

We describe a unifying method for proving relative loss bounds for online linearthreshold classification algorithms, such as the Perceptron and the Winnow algorithms. For classification problems the discrete loss is used, i.e., the total number of prediction mistakes. We introduce a continuous lossfunction, called the "linear hinge loss", that can be employed to derive the updates of the algorithms. We first prove bounds w.r.t. the linear hinge loss and then convert them to the discrete loss. We introduce anotion of "average margin" of a set of examples . We show how relative loss bounds based on the linear hinge loss can be converted to relative loss bounds i.t.o. the discrete loss using the average margin.

January 18, 2000 Email: marie@ai.sri.com

All regular members is available by writing to ncai@aaai.

In a complex, dynamic multiagent setting, coherent team actions are often jeopardized by conflicts in agents' beliefs, plans, and actions. Despite the considerable progress in teamwork research, the challenge of intrateam conflict resolution has remained largely unaddressed. This article presents CONSA, a system we are developing to resolve conflicts using argumentation-based negotiations. CONSA focuses on exploiting the benefits of argumentation in a team setting. Thus, CONSA casts conflict resolution as a team problem, so that the recent advances in teamwork can be brought to bear during conflict resolution to improve argumentation flexibility. Furthermore, because teamwork conflicts sometimes involve past teamwork, teamwork models can be exploited to provide agents with reusable argumentation knowledge. Additionally, CONSA also includes argumentation strategies geared toward benefiting the team, rather than the individual, and techniques to reduce argumentation overhead.