Current Focus Of Learning Research Most connectionist learning algorithms may be grouped into three general catagories, commonly referred to as supenJised, unsupenJised, and reinforcement learning. Supervised learning requires the explicit participation of an intelligent teacher, usually to provide the learning system with task-relevant input-output pairs (for two recent examples, see [1,2]). Unsupervised learning, exemplified by "clustering" algorithms, are generally concerned with detecting structure in a stream of input patterns [3,4,5,6,7]. In its final state, an unsupervised learning system will typically represent the discovered structure as a set of categories representing regions of the input space, or, more generally, as a mapping from the input space into a space of lower dimension that is somehow better suited to the task at hand. In reinforcement learning, a "critic" rewards or penalizes the learning system, until the system ultimately produces the correct output in response to a given input pattern [8]. It has seemed an inevitable tradeoff that systems needing to rapidly learn specific, behaviorally useful input-output mappings must necessarily do so under the auspices of an intelligent teacher with a ready supply of task-relevant training examples. This state of affairs has seemed somewhat paradoxical, since the processes of Rerceptual and cognitive development in human infants, for example, do not depend on the moment by moment intervention of a teacher of any sort. Learning by Doing The current work has been focused on a fourth type of learning algorithm, i.e. learning-bydoing, an approach that has been very little studied from either a connectionist perspective

We show how to estimate (1) the number of functions that can be implemented by a particular network architecture, (2) how much analog precision is needed in the connections in the network, and (3) the number of training examples the network must see before it can be expected to form reliable generalizations.

Current Focus Of Learning Research Most connectionist learning algorithms may be grouped into three general catagories, commonly referred to as supenJised, unsupenJised, and reinforcement learning. Supervised learning requires the explicit participation of an intelligent teacher, usually to provide the learning system with task-relevant input-output pairs (for two recent examples, see [1,2]). Unsupervised learning, exemplified by "clustering" algorithms, are generally concerned with detecting structure in a stream of input patterns [3,4,5,6,7]. In its final state, an unsupervised learning system will typically represent the discovered structure as a set of categories representing regions of the input space, or, more generally, as a mapping from the input space into a space of lower dimension that is somehow better suited to the task at hand. In reinforcement learning, a "critic" rewards or penalizes the learning system, until the system ultimately produces the correct output in response to a given input pattern [8]. It has seemed an inevitable tradeoff that systems needing to rapidly learn specific, behaviorally useful input-output mappings must necessarily do so under the auspices of an intelligent teacher with a ready supply of task-relevant training examples. This state of affairs has seemed somewhat paradoxical, since the processes of Rerceptual and cognitive development in human infants, for example, do not depend on the moment by moment intervention of a teacher of any sort. Learning by Doing The current work has been focused on a fourth type of learning algorithm, i.e. learning-bydoing, an approach that has been very little studied from either a connectionist perspective

We show how to estimate (1) the number of functions that can be implemented by a particular network architecture, (2) how much analog precision is needed in the connections in the network, and (3) the number of training examples the network must see before it can be expected to form reliable generalizations.

We show how to estimate (1) the number of functions that can be implemented by a particular network architecture, (2) how much analog precision is needed in the connections inthe network, and (3) the number of training examples the network must see before it can be expected to form reliable generalizations.

"The problem of formulating general concepts from specific training examples has long been a major focus of machine learning research. While most previous research has focused on empirical methods for generalizing from a large number of training examples using no domain-specific knowledge, in the past few years new methods have been developed for applying domain-specific knowledge to formulate valid generalizations from single training examples. The characteristic common to these methods is that their ability to generalize from a single example follows from their ability to explain why the training example is a member of the concept being learned. This paper proposes a general, domain-independent mechanism, called EBG, that unifies previous approaches to explanation-based generalization. The EBG method is illustrated in the context of several example problems, and used to contrast several existing systems for explanation-based generalization. The perspective on explanation-based generalization afforded by this general method is also used to identify open research problems in this area." Machine Learning, 1 (1), 47–80.

In AAAI-84, pp. 251–254.

Machine learning has always been an integral part of artificial intelligence, and its methodology has evolved in concert with the major concerns of the field. In response to the difficulties of encoding ever-increasing volumes of knowledge in modern AI systems, many researchers have recently turned their attention to machine learning as a means to overcome the knowledge acquisition bottleneck. This article presents a taxonomic analysis of machine learning organized primarily by learning strategies and secondarily by knowledge representation and application areas. A historical survey outlining the development of various approaches to machine learning is presented from early neural networks to present knowledge-intensive techniques.

"The purpose of this paper is to compare various approaches to generalization in terms of a single framework. Toward this end, generalization is cast as a search problem, and alternative methods for generalization are characterized in terms of the search strategies that they employ. This characterization uncovers similarities among approaches, and leads to a comparison of relative capabilities and computational complexities of alternative approaches. The characterization allows a precise comparison of systems that utilize different representations for learned generalizations."Artificial Intelligence, 18 (2), 203-26.

"The terms adaptation, learning, concept-formation, induction, self-organization, and self-repair have all been used in the context of learning system (LS) research. The research has been conducted within many different scientific communities, however, and these terms have come to have a variety of meanings. It is therefore often difficult to recognize that problems which are described differently may in fact be identical. Learning system models as well are often tuned to the require- ments of a particular discipline and are not suitable for application in related disciplines."In Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Technology, Vol. 11. Dekker