Multiple-instance learning is a variation on supervised learning, where the task is to learn a concept given positive and negative bags of instances. Each bag may contain many instances, but a bag is labeled positive even if only one of the instances in it falls within the concept. A bag is labeled negative only if all the instances in it are negative. We describe a new general framework, called Diverse Density, for solving multiple-instance learning problems. We apply this framework to learn a simple description of a person from a series of images (bags) containing that person, to a stock selection problem, and to the drug activity prediction problem.

Multiple-instance learning is a variation on supervised learning, where the task is to learn a concept given positive and negative bags of instances. Each bag may contain many instances, but a bag is labeled positive even if only one of the instances in it falls within the concept. A bag is labeled negative only if all the instances in it are negative. We describe a new general framework, called Diverse Density, for solving multiple-instance learning problems. We apply this framework to learn a simple description of a person from a series of images (bags) containing that person, to a stock selection problem, and to the drug activity prediction problem.

Multiple-instance learning is a variation on supervised learning, where the task is to learn a concept given positive and negative bags of instances. Each bag may contain many instances, but a bag is labeled positive even if only one of the instances in it falls within the concept. A bag is labeled negative only if all the instances in it are negative. We describe a new general framework, called Diverse Density, for solving multiple-instance learning problems. We apply this framework to learn a simple description of a person from a series of images (bags) containing that person, to a stock selection problem, and to the drug activity prediction problem.

Recognition of specific objects, such as recognition of a particular face, can be based on representations that are object centered, such as 3D structural models. Alternatively, a 3D object may be represented for the purpose of recognition in terms of a set of views. This latter class of models is biologically attractive because model acquisition - the learning phase - is simpler and more natural. A simple model for this strategy of object recognition was proposed by Poggio and Edelman (Poggio and Edelman, 1990). They showed that, with few views of an object used as training examples, a classification network, such as a Gaussian radial basis function network, can learn to recognize novel views of that object, in partic- 42 E. Bricolo, T. Poggio and N. Logothetis

Recognition of specific objects, such as recognition of a particular face, can be based on representations that are object centered, such as 3D structural models. Alternatively, a 3D object may be represented for the purpose of recognition in terms of a set of views. This latter class of models is biologically attractive because model acquisition - the learning phase - is simpler and more natural. A simple model for this strategy of object recognition was proposed by Poggio and Edelman (Poggio and Edelman, 1990). They showed that, with few views of an object used as training examples, a classification network, such as a Gaussian radial basis function network, can learn to recognize novel views of that object, in partic- 42 E. Bricolo, T. Poggio and N. Logothetis

Recognition of specific objects, such as recognition of a particular face, can be based on representations that are object centered, such as 3D structural models. Alternatively, a 3D object may be represented for the purpose of recognition in terms of a set of views. This latter class of models is biologically attractive because model acquisition - the learning phase - is simpler and more natural. A simple model for this strategy of object recognition was proposed by Poggio and Edelman (Poggio and Edelman, 1990). They showed that, with few views of an object usedas training examples, a classification network, such as a Gaussian radial basis function network, can learn to recognize novel views of that object, in partic- 42 E.Bricolo, T. Poggio and N. Logothetis (a) (b) View angle Figure 1: (a) Schematic representation of the architecture of the Poggio-Edelman model. The shaded circles correspond to the view-tuned units, each tuned to a view of the object, while the open circle correspond to the view-invariant, object specific output unit.

This paper investigates learning in a lifelong context. Lifelong learning addresses situations in which a learner faces a whole stream of learning tasks. Such scenarios provide the opportunity to transfer knowledge across multiple learning tasks, in order to generalize more accurately from less training data. In this paper, several different approaches to lifelong learning are described, and applied in an object recognition domain. It is shown that across the board, lifelong learning approaches generalize consistently more accurately from less training data, by their ability to transfer knowledge across learning tasks.

This paper investigates learning in a lifelong context. Lifelong learning addresses situations in which a learner faces a whole stream of learning tasks. Such scenarios provide the opportunity to transfer knowledge across multiple learning tasks, in order to generalize more accurately from less training data. In this paper, several different approaches to lifelong learning are described, and applied in an object recognition domain. It is shown that across the board, lifelong learning approaches generalize consistently more accurately from less training data, by their ability to transfer knowledge across learning tasks.

This paper presents a method for inducing logic programs from examples that learns a new class of concepts called first-order decision lists, defined as ordered lists of clauses each ending in a cut. The method, called FOIDL, is based on FOIL (Quinlan, 1990) but employs intensional background knowledge and avoids the need for explicit negative examples. It is particularly useful for problems that involve rules with specific exceptions, such as learning the past-tense of English verbs, a task widely studied in the context of the symbolic/connectionist debate. FOIDL is able to learn concise, accurate programs for this problem from significantly fewer examples than previous methods (both connectionist and symbolic).

We compare two strategies for training connectionist (as well as nonconnectionist) models for statistical pattern recognition. The probabilistic strategy is based on the notion that Bayesian discrimination (i.e.- optimal classification) is achieved when the classifier learns the a posteriori class distributions of the random feature vector. The differential strategy is based on the notion that the identity of the largest class a posteriori probability of the feature vector is all that is needed to achieve Bayesian discrimination. Each strategy is directly linked to a family of objective functions that can be used in the supervised training procedure. We prove that the probabilistic strategy - linked with error measure objective functions such as mean-squared-error and cross-entropy - typically used to train classifiers necessarily requires larger training sets and more complex classifier architectures than those needed to approximate the Bayesian discriminant function.