In this study, importance of user inputs is studied in the context of personalizing human activity recognition models using incremental learning. Inertial sensor data from three body positions are used, and the classification is based on Learn++ ensemble method. Three different approaches to update models are compared: non-supervised, semi-supervised and supervised. Non-supervised approach relies fully on predicted labels, supervised fully on user labeled data, and the proposed method for semi-supervised learning, is a combination of these two. In fact, our experiments show that by relying on predicted labels with high confidence, and asking the user to label only uncertain observations (from 12% to 26% of the observations depending on the used base classifier), almost as low error rates can be achieved as by using supervised approach. In fact, the difference was less than 2%-units. Moreover, unlike non-supervised approach, semi-supervised approach does not suffer from drastic concept drift, and thus, the error rate of the non-supervised approach is over 5%-units higher than using semi-supervised approach.

In this tutorial paper, we first define mean squared error, variance, covariance, and bias of both random variables and classification/predictor models. Then, we formulate the true and generalization errors of the model for both training and validation/test instances where we make use of the Stein's Unbiased Risk Estimator (SURE). We define overfitting, underfitting, and generalization using the obtained true and generalization errors. We introduce cross validation and two well-known examples which are $K$-fold and leave-one-out cross validations. We briefly introduce generalized cross validation and then move on to regularization where we use the SURE again. We work on both $\ell_2$ and $\ell_1$ norm regularizations. Then, we show that bootstrap aggregating (bagging) reduces the variance of estimation. Boosting, specifically AdaBoost, is introduced and it is explained as both an additive model and a maximum margin model, i.e., Support Vector Machine (SVM). The upper bound on the generalization error of boosting is also provided to show why boosting prevents from overfitting. As examples of regularization, the theory of ridge and lasso regressions, weight decay, noise injection to input/weights, and early stopping are explained. Random forest, dropout, histogram of oriented gradients, and single shot multi-box detector are explained as examples of bagging in machine learning and computer vision. Finally, boosting tree and SVM models are mentioned as examples of boosting.

Performance estimation aims at estimating the loss that a predictive model will incur on unseen data. These procedures are part of the pipeline in every machine learning project and are used for assessing the overall generalisation ability of predictive models. In this paper we address the application of these methods to time series forecasting tasks. For independent and identically distributed data the most common approach is cross-validation. However, the dependency among observations in time series raises some caveats about the most appropriate way to estimate performance in this type of data and currently there is no settled way to do so. We compare different variants of cross-validation and of out-of-sample approaches using two case studies: One with 62 real-world time series and another with three synthetic time series. Results show noticeable differences in the performance estimation methods in the two scenarios. In particular, empirical experiments suggest that cross-validation approaches can be applied to stationary time series. However, in real-world scenarios, when different sources of non-stationary variation are at play, the most accurate estimates are produced by out-of-sample methods that preserve the temporal order of observations.

Neuroscientists have enjoyed much success in understanding brain functions by constructing brain connectivity networks using data collected under highly controlled experimental settings. However, these experimental settings bear little resemblance to our real-life experience in day-to-day interactions with the surroundings. To address this issue, neuroscientists have been measuring brain activity under natural viewing experiments in which the subjects are given continuous stimuli, such as watching a movie or listening to a story. The main challenge with this approach is that the measured signal consists of both the stimulus-induced signal, as well as intrinsic-neural and non-neuronal signals. By exploiting the experimental design, we propose to estimate stimulus-locked brain network by treating non-stimulus-induced signals as nuisance parameters. In many neuroscience applications, it is often important to identify brain regions that are connected to many other brain regions during cognitive process. We propose an inferential method to test whether the maximum degree of the estimated network is larger than a pre-specific number. We prove that the type I error can be controlled and that the power increases to one asymptotically. Simulation studies are conducted to assess the performance of our method. Finally, we analyze a functional magnetic resonance imaging dataset obtained under the Sherlock Holmes movie stimuli.

We consider learning ancestral causal relationships in high dimensions. Our approach is driven by a supervised learning perspective, with discrete indicators of causal relationships treated as labels to be learned from available data. We focus on the setting in which some causal (ancestral) relationships are known (via background knowledge or experimental data) and put forward a general approach that scales to large problems. This is motivated by problems in human biology which are characterized by high dimensionality and potentially many latent variables. We present a case study involving interventional data from human cells with total dimension $p \! \sim \! 19{,}000$. Performance is assessed empirically by testing model output against previously unseen interventional data. The proposed approach is highly effective and demonstrably scalable to the human genome-wide setting. We consider sensitivity to background knowledge and find that results are robust to nontrivial perturbations of the input information. We consider also the case, relevant to some applications, where the only prior information available concerns a small number of known ancestral relationships.

In this paper, we consider a problem of failure prediction in the context of predictive maintenance applications. We present a new approach for rare failures prediction, based on a general methodology, which takes into account peculiar properties of technical systems. We illustrate the applicability of the method on the real-world test cases from aircraft operations.

When recruiting job candidates, employers rarely observe their underlying skill level directly. Instead, they must administer a series of interviews and/or collate other noisy signals in order to estimate the worker's skill. Traditional economics papers address screening models where employers access worker skill via a single noisy signal. In this paper, we extend this theoretical analysis to a multi-test setting, considering both Bernoulli and Gaussian models. We analyze the optimal employer policy both when the employer sets a fixed number of tests per candidate and when the employer can set a dynamic policy, assigning further tests adaptively based on results from the previous tests. To start, we characterize the optimal policy when employees constitute a single group, demonstrating some interesting trade-offs. Subsequently, we address the multi-group setting, demonstrating that when the noise levels vary across groups, a fundamental impossibility emerges whereby we cannot administer the same number of tests, subject candidates to the same decision rule, and yet realize the same outcomes in both groups.

This paper introduces Perturbed Model Validation (PMV), a new technique to validate model relevance and detect overfitting or underfitting. PMV operates by injecting noise to the training data, re-training the model against the perturbed data, then using the training accuracy decrease rate to assess model relevance. A larger decrease rate indicates better concept-hypothesis fit. We realise PMV by perturbing labels to inject noise, and evaluate PMV on four real-world datasets (breast cancer, adult, connect-4, and MNIST) and nine synthetic datasets in the classification setting. The results reveal that PMV selects models more precisely and in a more stable way than cross-validation, and effectively detects both overfitting and underfitting.

AP (Average precision) is a popular metric in measuring the accuracy of object detectors like Faster R-CNN, SSD, etc. Average precision computes the average precision value for recall value over 0 to 1. It sounds complicated but actually pretty simple as we illustrate it with an example. But before that, we will do a quick recap on precision, recall, and IoU first. Precision measures how accurate is your predictions. Recall measures how good you find all the positives.

Deep generative models (DGMs) of images are now sufficiently mature that they produce nearly photorealistic samples and obtain scores similar to the data distribution on heuristics such as Frechet Inception Distance. These results, especially on large-scale datasets such as ImageNet, suggest that DGMs are learning the data distribution in a perceptually meaningful space, and can be used in downstream tasks. To test this latter hypothesis, we use class-conditional generative models from a number of model classes---variational autoencoder, autoregressive models, and generative adversarial networks---to infer the class labels of real data. We perform this inference by training the image classifier using only synthetic data, and using the classifier to predict labels on real data. The performance on this task, which we call Classification Accuracy Score (CAS), highlights some surprising results not captured by traditional metrics and comprise our contributions. First, when using a state-of-the-art GAN (BigGAN), Top-5 accuracy decreases by 41.6% compared to the original data and conditional generative models from other model classes, such as high-resolution VQ-VAE and Hierarchical Autoregressive Models, substantially outperform GANs on this benchmark. Second, CAS automatically surfaces particular classes for which generative models failed to capture the data distribution, and were previously unknown in the literature. Third, we find traditional GAN metrics such as Frechet Inception Distance neither predictive of CAS nor useful when evaluating non-GAN models. Finally, we introduce Naive Augmentation Score, a variant of CAS where the image classifier is trained on both real and synthetic data, to demonstrate that naive augmentation improves classification performance in limited circumstances. In order to facilitate better diagnoses of generative models, we open-source the proposed metric.