In this paper, we consider the problem of active learning in trigonometric polynomialnetworks and give a necessary and sufficient condition of sample points to provide the optimal generalization capability. By analyzing thecondition from the functional analytic point of view, we clarify the mechanism of achieving the optimal generalization capability. We also show that a set of training examples satisfying the condition does not only provide the optimal generalization but also reduces the computational complexityand memory required for the calculation of learning results. Finally, examples of sample points satisfying the condition are given and computer simulations are performed to demonstrate the effectiveness ofthe proposed active learning method. 1 Introduction Supervised learning is obtaining an underlying rule from training examples, and can be formulated as a function approximation problem. If sample points are actively designed, then learning can be performed more efficiently. In this paper, we discuss the problem of designing sample points, referred to as active learning, for optimal generalization. Active learning is classified into two categories depending on the optimality. One is global optimal, where a set of all training examples is optimal (e.g.

We generalize a recent formalism to describe the dynamics of supervised learning in layered neural networks, in the regime where data recycling is inevitable, to the case of noisy teachers. Our theory generates reliable predictions for the evolution in time of training-and generalization errors, andextends the class of mathematically solvable learning processes in large neural networks to those situations where overfitting can occur.

I consider the problem of calculating learning curves (i.e., average generalization performance) of Gaussian processes used for regression. A simple expression for the generalization error in terms of the eigenvalue decomposition of the covariance function is derived, and used as the starting point for several approximation schemes. I identify where these become exact, and compare with existing bounds on learning curves; the new approximations, which can be used for any input space dimension, generally get substantially closer to the truth. 1 INTRODUCTION: GAUSSIAN PROCESSES Within the neural networks community, there has in the last few years been a good deal of excitement about the use of Gaussian processes as an alternative to feedforward networks [lJ. The advantages of Gaussian processes are that prior assumptions about the problem to be learned are encoded in a very transparent way, and that inference-at least in the case of regression that I will consider-is relatively straightforward. One crucial question for applications is then how'fast' Gaussian processes learn, i.e., how many training examples are needed to achieve a certain level of generalization performance.

Following recent results [9, 8] showing the importance of the fatshattering dimension in explaining the beneficial effect of a large margin on generalization performance, the current paper investigates the implications of these results for the case of imbalanced datasets and develops two approaches to setting the threshold. The approaches are incorporated into ThetaBoost, a boosting algorithm for dealing with unequal loss functions. The performance of ThetaBoost and the two approaches are tested experimentally.

We study the dynamics of supervised learning in layered neural networks, in the regime where the size p of the training set is proportional to the number N of inputs. Here the local fields are no longer described by Gaussian distributions.

I consider the problem of calculating learning curves (i.e., average generalization performance) of Gaussian processes used for regression. A simple expression for the generalization error in terms of the eigenvalue decomposition of the covariance function is derived, and used as the starting point for several approximation schemes. I identify where these become exact, and compare with existing bounds on learning curves; the new approximations, which can be used for any input space dimension, generally get substantially closer to the truth. 1 INTRODUCTION: GAUSSIAN PROCESSES Within the neural networks community, there has in the last few years been a good deal of excitement about the use of Gaussian processes as an alternative to feedforward networks [lJ. The advantages of Gaussian processes are that prior assumptions about the problem to be learned are encoded in a very transparent way, and that inference-at least in the case of regression that I will consider-is relatively straightforward. One crucial question for applications is then how'fast' Gaussian processes learn, i.e., how many training examples are needed to achieve a certain level of generalization performance.

Following recent results [9, 8] showing the importance of the fatshattering dimension in explaining the beneficial effect of a large margin on generalization performance, the current paper investigates the implications of these results for the case of imbalanced datasets and develops two approaches to setting the threshold. The approaches are incorporated into ThetaBoost, a boosting algorithm for dealing with unequal loss functions. The performance of ThetaBoost and the two approaches are tested experimentally.

We study the dynamics of supervised learning in layered neural networks, in the regime where the size p of the training set is proportional to the number N of inputs. Here the local fields are no longer described by Gaussian distributions.

We study the dynamics of supervised learning in layered neural networks, inthe regime where the size p of the training set is proportional to the number N of inputs. Here the local fields are no longer described by Gaussian distributions.

I consider the problem of calculating learning curves (i.e., average generalization performance) of Gaussian processes used for regression. Asimple expression for the generalization error in terms of the eigenvalue decomposition of the covariance function is derived, and used as the starting point for several approximation schemes. I identify where these become exact, and compare with existing bounds on learning curves; the new approximations, which can be used for any input space dimension, generally get substantially closer to the truth. 1 INTRODUCTION: GAUSSIAN PROCESSES Within the neural networks community, there has in the last few years been a good deal of excitement about the use of Gaussian processes as an alternative to feedforward networks [lJ. The advantages of Gaussian processes are that prior assumptions about the problem to be learned are encoded in a very transparent way, and that inference-at least in the case of regression that I will consider-is relatively straightforward. One crucial question for applications is then how'fast' Gaussian processes learn, i.e., how many training examples are needed to achieve a certain level of generalization performance.