We study the application of dynamic pricing to insurance. We view this as an online revenue management problem where the insurance company looks to set prices to optimize the long-run revenue from selling a new insurance product. We develop two pricing models: an adaptive Generalized Linear Model (GLM) and an adaptive Gaussian Process (GP) regression model. Both balance between exploration, where we choose prices in order to learn the distribution of demands & claims for the insurance product, and exploitation, where we myopically choose the best price from the information gathered so far. The performance of the pricing policies is measured in terms of regret: the expected revenue loss caused by not using the optimal price. As is commonplace in insurance, we model demand and claims by GLMs. In our adaptive GLM design, we use the maximum quasi-likelihood estimation (MQLE) to estimate the unknown parameters. We show that, if prices are chosen with suitably decreasing variability, the MQLE parameters eventually exist and converge to the correct values, which in turn implies that the sequence of chosen prices will also converge to the optimal price. In the adaptive GP regression model, we sample demand and claims from Gaussian Processes and then choose selling prices by the upper confidence bound rule. We also analyze these GLM and GP pricing algorithms with delayed claims. Although similar results exist in other domains, this is among the first works to consider dynamic pricing problems in the field of insurance. We also believe this is the first work to consider Gaussian Process regression in the context of insurance pricing. These initial findings suggest that online machine learning algorithms could be a fruitful area of future investigation and application in insurance.

An $\varepsilon$-coreset for Least-Mean-Squares (LMS) of a matrix $A\in{\mathbb{R}}^{n\times d}$ is a small weighted subset of its rows that approximates the sum of squared distances from its rows to every affine $k$-dimensional subspace of ${\mathbb{R}}^d$, up to a factor of $1\pm\varepsilon$. Such coresets are useful for hyper-parameter tuning and solving many least-mean-squares problems such as low-rank approximation ($k$-SVD), $k$-PCA, Lassso/Ridge/Linear regression and many more. Coresets are also useful for handling streaming, dynamic and distributed big data in parallel. With high probability, non-uniform sampling based on upper bounds on what is known as importance or sensitivity of each row in $A$ yields a coreset. The size of the (sampled) coreset is then near-linear in the total sum of these sensitivity bounds. We provide algorithms that compute provably \emph{tight} bounds for the sensitivity of each input row. It is based on two ingredients: (i) iterative algorithm that computes the exact sensitivity of each point up to arbitrary small precision for (non-affine) $k$-subspaces, and (ii) a general reduction of independent interest from computing sensitivity for the family of affine $k$-subspaces in ${\mathbb{R}}^d$ to (non-affine) $(k+1)$- subspaces in ${\mathbb{R}}^{d+1}$. Experimental results on real-world datasets, including the English Wikipedia documents-term matrix, show that our bounds provide significantly smaller and data-dependent coresets also in practice. Full open source is also provided.

Many people think that artificial intelligence and machine learning are recent phenomena. However, these techniques and ideas actually go back deep into human history. Machine learning has always been an important tool for data mining for humanity, it was given different names in different eras. The key to machine learning is not machines but mathematics. There is nothing special about silicon and electricity.

A logistic regression model is said to be statistically significant only when the p-Values are less than the pre-determined statistical significance level, which is ideally 0.05. The p-value for each coefficient is represented as a probability Pr( z). We see here that both the coefficients have a very low p-value which means that both the coefficients are essential in computing the response variable. The stars corresponding to the p-values indicate the significance of that respective variable. Since in our model, both the p values have a 3 star, this indicates that both the variables are extremely significant in predicting the response variable.

To keep things simple, we will start with running example in which we consider the problem of estimating the price of a house (e.g. in dollars) based on area (e.g. in square feet) and age (e.g. in years). In economics papers, it is common for authors to write out linear models in this format with a gigantic equation that spans multiple lines containing terms for every single feature. For the high-dimensional data that we often address in machine learning, writing out the entire model can be tedious. In these cases, we will find it more convenient to use linear algebra notation. Above, the vector \(\mathbf{x}\) corresponds to a single data point.

We present a detailed analysis of the class of regression decision tree algorithms which employ a regulized piecewise-linear node-splitting criterion and have regularized linear models at the leaves. From a theoretic standpoint, based on Rademacher complexity framework, we present new high-probability upper bounds for the generalization error for the proposed classes of regularized regression decision tree algorithms, including LASSO-type, and $\ell_{2}$ regularization for linear models at the leaves. Theoretical result are further extended by considering a general type of variable selection procedure. Furthermore, in our work we demonstrate that the class of piecewise-linear regression trees is not only numerically stable but can be made tractable via an algorithmic implementation, presented herein, as well as with the help of modern GPU technology. Empirically, we present results on multiple datasets which highlight the strengths and potential pitfalls, of the proposed tree algorithms compared to baselines which grow trees based on piecewise constant models.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) study and use is on the rise. Tools to enable AI are becoming more readily available, simpler to use and easier to implement. What's more is that the definition of AI itself has been broken down into ingredients that, when later applied into a recipe (or process), can provide multiple desired outcomes. One of the more important ingredients used in most recipes is Machine Learning. Machine Learning in essence is a way of teaching computers to provide more accurate predictions on provided data.

With the deluge of digitized information in the Big Data era, massive datasets are becoming increasingly available for learning predictive models. However, in many situations, the poor control of data acquisition processes may naturally jeopardize the outputs of machine-learning algorithms and selection bias issues are now the subject of much attention in the literature. It is precisely the purpose of the present article to investigate how to extend Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM), the main paradigm of statistical learning, when the training observations are generated from biased models, i.e. from distributions that are different from that of the data in the test/prediction stage. Precisely, we show how to build a "nearly debiased" training statistical population from biased samples and the related biasing functions following in the footsteps of the approach originally proposed in Vardi et al. (1985) and study, from a non asymptotic perspective, the performance of minimizers of an empirical version of the risk computed from the statistical population thus constructed. Remarkably, the learning rate achieved by this procedure is of the same order as that attained in absence of any selection bias phenomenon. Beyond these theoretical guarantees, illustrative experimental results supporting the relevance of the algorithmic approach promoted in this paper are also displayed.

I argue that regularizing terms in standard regression methods not only help against overfitting finite data, but sometimes also yield better causal models in the infinite sample regime. I first consider a multi-dimensional variable linearly influencing a target variable with some multi-dimensional unobserved common cause, where the confounding effect can be decreased by keeping the penalizing term in Ridge and Lasso regression even in the population limit. Choosing the size of the penalizing term, is however challenging, because cross validation is pointless. Here it is done by first estimating the strength of confounding via a method proposed earlier, which yielded some reasonable results for simulated and real data. Further, I prove a `causal generalization bound' which states (subject to a particular model of confounding) that the error made by interpreting any non-linear regression as causal model can be bounded from above whenever functions are taken from a not too rich class. In other words, the bound guarantees "generalization" from observational to interventional distributions, which is usually not subject of statistical learning theory (and is only possible due to the underlying symmetries of the confounder model).

Physical modeling of robotic system behavior is the foundation for controlling many robotic mechanisms to a satisfactory degree. Mechanisms are also typically designed in a way that good model accuracy can be achieved with relatively simple models and model identification strategies. If the modeling accuracy using physically based models is not enough or too complex, model-free methods based on machine learning techniques can help. Of particular interest to us was therefore the question to what degree semi-parametric modeling techniques, meaning combinations of physical models with machine learning, increase the modeling accuracy of inverse dynamics models which are typically used in robot control. To this end, we evaluated semi-parametric Gaussian process regression and a novel model-based neural network architecture, and compared their modeling accuracy to a series of naive semi-parametric, parametric-only and non-parametric-only regression methods. The comparison has been carried out on three test scenarios, one involving a real test-bed and two involving simulated scenarios, with the most complex scenario targeting the modeling a simulated robot's inverse dynamics model. We found that in all but one case, semi-parametric Gaussian process regression yields the most accurate models, also with little tuning required for the training procedure.