An increasing number of projects in neuroscience requires the statistical analysis of high dimensional data sets, as, for instance, in predicting behavior from neural firing or in operating artificial devices from brain recordings in brain-machine interfaces. Linear analysis techniques remain prevalent in such cases, but classical linear regression approaches are often numerically too fragile in high dimensions. In this paper, we address the question of whether EMG data collected from arm movements of monkeys can be faithfully reconstructed with linear approaches from neural activity in primary motor cortex (M1). To achieve robust data analysis, we develop a full Bayesian approach to linear regression that automatically detects and excludes irrelevant features in the data, regularizing against overfitting. In comparison with ordinary least squares, stepwise regression, partial least squares, LASSO regression and a brute force combinatorial search for the most predictive input features in the data, we demonstrate that the new Bayesian method offers a superior mixture of characteristics in terms of regularization against overfitting, computational efficiency and ease of use, demonstrating its potential as a drop-in replacement for other linear regression techniques. As neuroscientific results, our analyses demonstrate that EMG data can be well predicted from M1 neurons, further opening the path for possible real-time interfaces between brains and machines.

We present a probabilistic generative model of entity relationships and their attributes that simultaneously discovers groups among the entities and topics among the corresponding textual attributes. Block-models of relationship data have been studied in social network analysis for some time. Here we simultaneously cluster in several modalities at once, incorporating the attributes (here, words) associated with certain relationships. Significantly, joint inference allows the discovery of topics to be guided by the emerging groups, and vice-versa. We present experimental results on two large data sets: sixteen years of bills put before the U.S. Senate, comprising their corresponding text and voting records, and thirteen years of similar data from the United Nations. We show that in comparison with traditional, separate latent-variable models for words, or Block-structures for votes, the Group-Topic model's joint inference discovers more cohesive groups and improved topics.

The best performing algorithms for a particular oversubscribed scheduling application, Air Force Satellite Control Network (AFSCN) scheduling, appear to have little in common. Yet, through careful experimentation and modeling of performance in real problem instances, we can relate characteristics of the best algorithms to characteristics of the application. In particular, we find that plateaus dominate the search spaces (thus favoring algorithms that make larger changes to solutions) and that some randomization in exploration is critical to good performance (due to the lack of gradient information on the plateaus). Based on our explanations of algorithm performance, we develop a new algorithm that combines characteristics of the best performers; the new algorithm's performance is better than the previous best. We show how hypothesis driven experimentation and search modeling can both explain algorithm performance and motivate the design of a new algorithm.

Allocating scarce resources among agents to maximize global utility is, in general, computationally challenging. We focus on problems where resources enable agents to execute actions in stochastic environments, modeled as Markov decision processes (MDPs), such that the value of a resource bundle is defined as the expected value of the optimal MDP policy realizable given these resources. We present an algorithm that simultaneously solves the resource-allocation and the policy-optimization problems. This allows us to avoid explicitly representing utilities over exponentially many resource bundles, leading to drastic (often exponential) reductions in computational complexity. We then use this algorithm in the context of self-interested agents to design a combinatorial auction for allocating resources. We empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach by showing that it can, in minutes, optimally solve problems for which a straightforward combinatorial resource-allocation technique would require the agents to enumerate up to 2^100 resource bundles and the auctioneer to solve an NP-complete problem with an input of that size.

This article is my personal account on the work at Stanford on Stanley, the winning robot in the DARPA Grand Challenge. Between July 2004 and October 2005, my then-postdoc Michael Montemerlo and I led a team of students, engineers, and professionals with the single vision of claiming one of the most prestigious trophies in the field of robotics: the DARPA Grand Challenge (DARPA 2004). The Grand Challenge, organized by the U.S. government, was unprecedented in the nation's history. Instead, this is my personal story of leading the Stanford Racing Team.

What Do We Know about Knowledge? In this article, I will examine the first of these questions. AI has been slow to embrace this principle. Programs demonstrating research ideas in AI are often too large and not well enough documented to allow replication or sharing. What I would like to in diverse conditions. I wish to clarify the knowledge example, it was pretty clearly articulated in Biblical principle and try to increase our understanding times: "A man of knowledge increaseth of what programmers and program strength" (Proverbs 24: 5). Greek philosophers based their lives on acquiring The "knowledge is power" principle is most and transferring knowledge. In the course closely associated with Francis Bacon, from his of teaching, they sought to understand the 1597 tract on heresies: "Nam et ipsa scientia nature of knowledge and how we can establish potestas est." ("In and of itself, knowledge is knowledge of the natural world. B," along with quantification, "All A's are B's," Euclid's geometry firmly established the concept In the intervening several centuries before Plato, Socrates's pupil and Aristotle's mentor, was the first to pose the question in writing of the Middle Ages and the rise of modern science what we mean when we say that a person in the West, He was distinguishing empirical knowledge, church to make new knowledge fit with established lacking complete certainty, from the certain dogma.

The computer The articles collected for this special 82-85. "Lexington is the home of Massachusetts Bolitho and Dr. Martin Klein, who set a superintelligent electronic'brain' collage in 1956. Please note that: (1) an the machine to music, emphasized that which reduces to a bare minimum the human excerpt may not reflect the overall tenor of their accomplishment was'an experiment element in the complex problem of the article, nor contain all of the relevant of mathematical importance only.' It is tracking and destroying an attacking airplane. Science News more popularly known -- can sight the approach - Jon Glick, Webmaster, AI TOPICS Letter. "A gambling of an attacker, compute its course, As is now well known, in operation at the Bell Telephone Laboratories, kill.

This is a wonderful opportunity, yet a position is very hard to match in any other. The first AAAI conference was held at Stanford University; it was very much a research conference, a scientific event that generated a lot of excitement. The conference was small and intimate, with few parallel sessions. There were excellent opportunities for us to talk to one another. AAAI-80 gave real substance to the organization, clearly getting AAAI off on the right foot, and it gave new identity and cohesiveness to the field. This year--2006--has also been a big year, celebrating the 50th anniversary of the original meeting at Dartmouth College, where the name "artificial intelligence" first came into common use. Numerous events around the world, including a celebratory symposium at Dartmouth and an AAAI Fellows Symposium associated with AAAI-05, have marked this important milestone in the history of the field. Progress since our first AAAI conference has The First AAAI Conference was Held at Stanford University. While each year's results may have seemed incremental, when we look back over the entire period we see some truly amazing plate the big picture and, perhaps more importantly things. In job at DARPA), to identify gaps in our national hindsight this may no longer look so exciting computing research agenda. It also occurred to (purists will say that it was not an "AI" system me that that perspective was a very special that beat Garry Kasparov but rather a highly asset to use in drafting this presidential engineered special-purpose machine largely address. Looking forward from back then, no want to raise a broad issue and consider matter how Deep Blue actually worked, playing some larger questions regarding the nature of chess well was clearly an AI problem--in fact, a the field itself and the role that AAAI as an classical one--and our success was historic.

The celebration then moved to web and integrated intelligence, as on Artificial Intelligence and Boston where a huge turnout of AAAI well as the nectar and senior member the Nineteenth Innovative Applications fellows--from founding luminaries to papers, is a significant factor in this of Artificial Intelligence Conference 2006 fellow inductees--reported a trend." Senior member papers are a commemorated fifty years of great weekend meeting prior to the way to collect reflections about areas artificial intelligence research in AAAI conference full of discussions of work by leaders in the field.

This article is my personal account on the work at Stanford on Stanley, the winning robot in the DARPA Grand Challenge. Between July 2004 and October 2005, my then-postdoc Michael Montemerlo and I led a team of students, engineers, and professionals with the single vision of claiming one of the most prestigious trophies in the field of robotics: the DARPA Grand Challenge (DARPA 2004). The Grand Challenge, organized by the U.S. government, was unprecedented in the nation's history. It was the first time that the U.S. Congress had appropriated a cash price for advancing technological innovation. My team won this prize, competing with some 194 other teams. Stanley was the fastest of five robotic vehicles that, on October 8, 2005, successfully navigated a 131.6-mile-long course through California's Mojave Desert. This essay is not about the technology behind our success; for that I refer the interested reader to recent articles on the technical aspects of Stanley. Instead, this is my personal story of leading the Stanford Racing Team. It is the story of a team of people who built an autonomous robot in record time. It is also a success story for the field of artificial intelligence, as Stanley used some state of the art AI methods in areas such as probabilistic inference, machine learning, and computer vision. Of course, it is also the story of a step towards a technology that, one day, might fundamentally change our lives.