Inductive Learning
Supervised learning sets benchmark for robust spike detection from calcium imaging signals
Theis, Lucas, Berens, Philipp, Froudarakis, Emmanouil, Reimer, Jacob, Rosón, Miroslav Román, Baden, Tom, Euler, Thomas, Tolias, Andreas, Bethge, Matthias
A fundamental challenge in calcium imaging has been to infer the timing of action potentials from the measured noisy calcium fluorescence traces. We systematically evaluate a range of spike inference algorithms on a large benchmark dataset recorded from varying neural tissue (V1 and retina) using different calcium indicators (OGB-1 and GCamp6). We show that a new algorithm based on supervised learning in flexible probabilistic models outperforms all previously published techniques, setting a new standard for spike inference from calcium signals. Importantly, it performs better than other algorithms even on datasets not seen during training. Future data acquired in new experimental conditions can easily be used to further improve its spike prediction accuracy and generalization performance. Finally, we show that comparing algorithms on artificial data is not informative about performance on real population imaging data, suggesting that a benchmark dataset may greatly facilitate future algorithmic developments.
Deep Distributed Random Samplings for Supervised Learning: An Alternative to Random Forests?
In (\cite{zhang2014nonlinear,zhang2014nonlinear2}), we have viewed machine learning as a coding and dimensionality reduction problem, and further proposed a simple unsupervised dimensionality reduction method, entitled deep distributed random samplings (DDRS). In this paper, we further extend it to supervised learning incrementally. The key idea here is to incorporate label information into the coding process by reformulating that each center in DDRS has multiple output units indicating which class the center belongs to. The supervised learning method seems somewhat similar with random forests (\cite{breiman2001random}), here we emphasize their differences as follows. (i) Each layer of our method considers the relationship between part of the data points in training data with all training data points, while random forests focus on building each decision tree on only part of training data points independently. (ii) Our method builds gradually-narrowed network by sampling less and less data points, while random forests builds gradually-narrowed network by merging subclasses. (iii) Our method is trained more straightforward from bottom layer to top layer, while random forests build each tree from top layer to bottom layer by splitting. (iv) Our method encodes output targets implicitly in sparse codes, while random forests encode output targets by remembering the class attributes of the activated nodes. Therefore, our method is a simpler, more straightforward, and maybe a better alternative choice, though both methods use two very basic elements---randomization and nearest neighbor optimization---as the core. This preprint is used to protect the incremental idea from (\cite{zhang2014nonlinear,zhang2014nonlinear2}). Full empirical evaluation will be announced carefully later.
GENERALIZATION As SEARCH / 517 Generalization as Search
We learn (memorize) multiplication tables, learn (discover how) to walk, learn (build UP an understanding of, then an ability to synthesize) languages. Many subtasks and capabilities are involved in these various kinds of learning. One capability central to many kinds of learning is the ability to generalize: to take into account a large number of specific observations, then to extract and retain the important common features that characterize classes of these observations. This generalization problem has received considerable attention for two decades in the fields of Artificial Intelligence, Psychology, and Pattern Recognition (e.g., [Bruner, 1956],
10 An Experiment on Inductive Learning in Chess End Games
INTRODUCTION Further progress in the application of computers to many practical fields seems to depend heavily on the success in implementing learning and inductive processes within machines. For example, to develop a consultation system for medical or plant disease diagnosis, prognosis and decision making in general, it is very desirable, perhaps even necessary, to be able to'teach' the system through examples of correct and/or incorrect decisions, rather than by precisely describing the decision process in its full generality and then transforming this description into a computer program. A similar situation exists in computer chess. The development of computer programs playing at the master level (especially the end games) seems to be a formidable task if the programs are not eventually able to learn and improve on their decision making rules through the specific examples of games, rather than by being explicitly told all the rules. Due to easy access to human knowledge about chess and the relative simplicity of testing the results, chess is one of the most attractive testing domains for inductive inference programs. This report presents first results from an experiment on the application of an inductive learning program called AQVAL/1 developed at the University of Illinois, to chess end games.
MACHINE INTELLIGENCE 13
The two outstanding figures in the history of computer science are Alan Turing and John von Neumann, and they shared the view that logic was the key to understanding and automating computation. In particular, it was Turing who gave us in the mid-1930s the fundamental analysis, and the logical definition, of the concept of'computability by machine' and who discovered the surprising and beautiful basic fact that there exist universal machines which by suitable programming can be made to t This essay is an expanded and revised version of one entitled The Role of Logic in Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, which was completed in January 1992 (and was later published in the Proceedings of the Fifth Generation computer Systems 1992 Conference). Since completing that essay I have had the benefit of extremely helpful discussions on many of the details with Professor Donald Michie and Professor I. J. Good, both of whom knew Turing well during the war years at Bletchley Park. Professor J. A. N. Lee, whose knowledge of the literature and archives of the history of computing is encyclopedic, also provided additional information, some of which is still unpublished. Further light has very recently been shed on the von Neumann side of the story by Norman Macrae's excellent biography John von Neumann (Macrae 1992). Accordingly, it seemed appropriate to undertake a more complete and thorough version of the FGCS'92 essay, focussing somewhat more on the interesting historical and biographical issues. I am grateful to Donald Michie and Stephen Muggleton for inviting me to contribute such a'second edition' to the present volume, and I would also like to thank the Institute for New Computer Technology (ICOT) for kind permission to make use of the FGCS'92 essay in this way. 1 LOGIC, COMPUTERS, TURING, AND VON NEUMANN
MACHINE INTELLIGENCE 11
In this paper we will be concerned with such reasoning in its most general form, that is, in inferences that are defeasible: given more information, we may retract them. The purpose of this paper is to introduce a form of non-monotonic inference based on the notion of a partial model of the world. We take partial models to reflect our partial knowledge of the true state of affairs. We then define non-monotonic inference as the process of filling in unknown parts of the model with conjectures: statements that could turn out to be false, given more complete knowledge. To take a standard example from default reasoning: since most birds can fly, if Tweety is a bird it is reasonable to assume that she can fly, at least in the absence of any information to the contrary. We thus have some justification for filling in our partial picture of the world with this conjecture. If our knowledge includes the fact that Tweety is an ostrich, then no such justification exists, and the conjecture must be retracted.
Report 83 27 Discovering Patterns in Sequences of Objects . S Stanford Thomas G. S. May 1983
A more general kind of sequence-prediction problem--the non-deterministic prediction problem--is defined, and a general methodology for its solution presented. The methodology, called SPARC, employs multiple description models to guide the search for plausible sequence-generating rules. Three different models are presented along with algorithms for instantiating them to discover rules. The instantiation process requires that the initial input sequence be substantially transformed to make explicit important features of the sequence. Four different data transformation operators arc described. The architecture of a system called SPARC/E is presented, which implements most of the methodology for discovering sequence-generating rules in the card game Elcusis. Examples of the execution of SPARC/E are presented.
HPP-77-39
In the early days of computing, these goals were central to the new discipline called cybernetics [126], [2]. Over the past two decades, progress toward these goals has come from a variety of fields - notably computer science, psychology, adaptive control theory, pattern recognition, and philosophy. Substantial progress has been made in developing techniques for machine learning in highly restricted environments.