The demand for real-time, affordable, and efficient smart healthcare services is increasing exponentially due to the technological revolution and burst of population. To meet the increasing demands on this critical infrastructure, there is a need for intelligent methods to cope with the existing obstacles in this area. In this regard, edge computing technology can reduce latency and energy consumption by moving processes closer to the data sources in comparison to the traditional centralized cloud and IoT-based healthcare systems. In addition, by bringing automated insights into the smart healthcare systems, artificial intelligence (AI) provides the possibility of detecting and predicting high-risk diseases in advance, decreasing medical costs for patients, and offering efficient treatments. The objective of this article is to highlight the benefits of the adoption of edge intelligent technology, along with AI in smart healthcare systems. Moreover, a novel smart healthcare model is proposed to boost the utilization of AI and edge technology in smart healthcare systems. Additionally, the paper discusses issues and research directions arising when integrating these different technologies together.

This paper presents a clustering algorithm that is an extension of the Category Trees algorithm. Category Trees is a clustering method that creates tree structures that branch on category type and not feature. The development in this paper is to consider a secondary order of clustering that is not the category to which the data row belongs, but the tree, representing a single classifier, that it is eventually clustered with. Each tree branches to store subsets of other categories, but the rows in those subsets may also be related. This paper is therefore concerned with looking at that second level of clustering between the other category subsets, to try to determine if there is any consistency over it. It is argued that Principal Components may be a related and reciprocal type of structure, and there is an even bigger question about the relation between exemplars and principal components, in general. The theory is demonstrated using the Portugal Forest Fires dataset as a case study. The distributed nature of that dataset can artificially create the tree categories and the output criterion can also be determined in an automatic and arbitrary way, leading to a flexible and dynamic clustering mechanism.

We ask the following question: what training information is required to design an effective outlier/out-of-distribution (OOD) detector, i.e., detecting samples that lie far away from the training distribution? Since unlabeled data is easily accessible for many applications, the most compelling approach is to develop detectors based on only unlabeled in-distribution data. However, we observe that most existing detectors based on unlabeled data perform poorly, often equivalent to a random prediction. In contrast, existing state-of-the-art OOD detectors achieve impressive performance but require access to fine-grained data labels for supervised training. We propose SSD, an outlier detector based on only unlabeled in-distribution data. We use self-supervised representation learning followed by a Mahalanobis distance based detection in the feature space. We demonstrate that SSD outperforms most existing detectors based on unlabeled data by a large margin. Additionally, SSD even achieves performance on par, and sometimes even better, with supervised training based detectors. Finally, we expand our detection framework with two key extensions. First, we formulate few-shot OOD detection, in which the detector has access to only one to five samples from each class of the targeted OOD dataset. Second, we extend our framework to incorporate training data labels, if available. We find that our novel detection framework based on SSD displays enhanced performance with these extensions, and achieves state-of-the-art performance. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/inspire-group/SSD.

There has been a recent resurgence of interest in explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) that aims to reduce the opaqueness of AI-based decision-making systems, allowing humans to scrutinize and trust them. Prior work in this context has focused on the attribution of responsibility for an algorithm's decisions to its inputs wherein responsibility is typically approached as a purely associational concept. In this paper, we propose a principled causality-based approach for explaining black-box decision-making systems that addresses limitations of existing methods in XAI. At the core of our framework lies probabilistic contrastive counterfactuals, a concept that can be traced back to philosophical, cognitive, and social foundations of theories on how humans generate and select explanations. We show how such counterfactuals can quantify the direct and indirect influences of a variable on decisions made by an algorithm, and provide actionable recourse for individuals negatively affected by the algorithm's decision. Unlike prior work, our system, LEWIS: (1)can compute provably effective explanations and recourse at local, global and contextual levels (2)is designed to work with users with varying levels of background knowledge of the underlying causal model and (3)makes no assumptions about the internals of an algorithmic system except for the availability of its input-output data. We empirically evaluate LEWIS on three real-world datasets and show that it generates human-understandable explanations that improve upon state-of-the-art approaches in XAI, including the popular LIME and SHAP. Experiments on synthetic data further demonstrate the correctness of LEWIS's explanations and the scalability of its recourse algorithm.

The analysis of the compression effects in generative adversarial networks (GANs) after training, i.e. without any fine-tuning, remains an unstudied, albeit important, topic with the increasing trend of their computation and memory requirements. While existing works discuss the difficulty of compressing GANs during training, requiring novel methods designed with the instability of GANs training in mind, we show that existing compression methods (namely clipping and quantization) may be directly applied to compress GANs post-training, without any additional changes. High compression levels may distort the generated set, likely leading to an increase of outliers that may negatively affect the overall assessment of existing k-nearest neighbor (KNN) based metrics. We propose two new precision and recall metrics based on locality-sensitive hashing (LSH), which, on top of increasing the outlier robustness, decrease the complexity of assessing an evaluation sample against $n$ reference samples from $O(n)$ to $O(\log(n))$, if using LSH and KNN, and to $O(1)$, if only applying LSH. We show that low-bit compression of several pre-trained GANs on multiple datasets induces a trade-off between precision and recall, retaining sample quality while sacrificing sample diversity.

Identifying the influence of training data for data cleansing can improve the accuracy of deep learning. An approach with stochastic gradient descent (SGD) called SGD-influence to calculate the influence scores was proposed, but, the calculation costs are expensive. It is necessary to temporally store the parameters of the model during training phase for inference phase to calculate influence sores. In close connection with the previous method, we propose a method to reduce cache files to store the parameters in training phase for calculating inference score. We only adopt the final parameters in last epoch for influence functions calculation. In our experiments on classification, the cache size of training using MNIST dataset with our approach is 1.236 MB. On the other hand, the previous method used cache size of 1.932 GB in last epoch. It means that cache size has been reduced to 1/1,563. We also observed the accuracy improvement by data cleansing with removal of negatively influential data using our approach as well as the previous method. Moreover, our simple and general proposed method to calculate influence scores is available on our auto ML tool without programing, Neural Network Console. The source code is also available.

Most of unsupervised person Re-Identification (Re-ID) works produce pseudo-labels by measuring the feature similarity without considering the distribution discrepancy among cameras, leading to degraded accuracy in label computation across cameras. This paper targets to address this challenge by studying a novel intra-inter camera similarity for pseudo-label generation. We decompose the sample similarity computation into two stage, i.e., the intra-camera and inter-camera computations, respectively. The intra-camera computation directly leverages the CNN features for similarity computation within each camera. Pseudo-labels generated on different cameras train the re-id model in a multi-branch network. The second stage considers the classification scores of each sample on different cameras as a new feature vector. This new feature effectively alleviates the distribution discrepancy among cameras and generates more reliable pseudo-labels. We hence train our re-id model in two stages with intra-camera and inter-camera pseudo-labels, respectively. This simple intra-inter camera similarity produces surprisingly good performance on multiple datasets, e.g., achieves rank-1 accuracy of 89.5% on the Market1501 dataset, outperforming the recent unsupervised works by 9+%, and is comparable with the latest transfer learning works that leverage extra annotations.

Recognizing relations between entities is a pivotal task of relational learning. Learning relation representations from distantly-labeled datasets is difficult because of the abundant label noise and complicated expressions in human language. This paper aims to learn predictive, interpretable, and robust relation representations from distantly-labeled data that are effective in different settings, including supervised, distantly supervised, and few-shot learning. Instead of solely relying on the supervision from noisy labels, we propose to learn prototypes for each relation from contextual information to best explore the intrinsic semantics of relations. Prototypes are representations in the feature space abstracting the essential semantics of relations between entities in sentences. We learn prototypes based on objectives with clear geometric interpretation, where the prototypes are unit vectors uniformly dispersed in a unit ball, and statement embeddings are centered at the end of their corresponding prototype vectors on the surface of the ball. This approach allows us to learn meaningful, interpretable prototypes for the final classification. Results on several relation learning tasks show that our model significantly outperforms the previous state-of-the-art models. We further demonstrate the robustness of the encoder and the interpretability of prototypes with extensive experiments.

Today's organizations are awash in data. Just a decade ago, a gigabyte of data still seemed like a large quantity. Nowadays, however, some large organizations are managing upward of a zettabyte. To get a sense of how much data that is, if your typical laptop or desktop computer has a 1 TB hard drive inside it, a zettabyte is equal to one billion of those hard drives. How can organizations even hope to get any business value from so much data?

So I am currently doing a customer segmentation project which I am trying to learn and visualise data using 3d scatter graphs based on basket analysis, a friend told me K-means algorithm was the most optimal algorithm for this task, but out of curiosity I produced results using a hierarchical algorithm but not sure what the results pertain? Comparing both results, I am struggling to understand what is actually happening? In the k means algorithm I can see the 3rd cluster show higher annual income but less spending which means alternative methods such as advertisements can help encourage this demographic to spend more, but the hierarchical algorithm just seems random, not sure what is happening here? The colour of the clusters just seem like they have changed positions (not sure if this matters or if I did something wrong) compared to k means and clusters look bigger however the clusters remain in the same position/pattern as that of k means but less accurate reads, not sure what is happening here?