Domain adaptation (DA) arises as an important problem in statistical machine learning when the source data used to train a model is different from the target data used to test the model. Recent advances in DA have mainly been application-driven and have largely relied on the idea of a common subspace for source and target data. To understand the empirical successes and failures of DA methods, we propose a theoretical framework via structural causal models that enables analysis and comparison of the prediction performance of DA methods. This framework also allows us to itemize the assumptions needed for the DA methods to have a low target error. Additionally, with insights from our theory, we propose a new DA method called CIRM that outperforms existing DA methods when both the covariates and label distributions are perturbed in the target data. We complement the theoretical analysis with extensive simulations to show the necessity of the devised assumptions. Reproducible synthetic and real data experiments are also provided to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of DA methods when parts of the assumptions of our theory are violated.

Formally a decision tree is a graphical representation of all possible solutions to a decision. These days, tree-based algorithms are the most commonly used algorithms in case of supervised learning scenarios. They are easier to interpret and visualize with great adaptability. We can use tree-based algorithms for both regression and classification problems, However, most of the time they are used for classification problem. Let's understand a decision tree from an example: Yesterday evening, I skipped dinner at my usual time because I was busy taking care of some stuff. Later in the night, I felt butterflies in my stomach.

The environments in which we deploy machine learning (ML) algorithms rarely look exactly like the environments in which we collected our training data. Unfortunately, we lack methodology for evaluating how well an algorithm will generalize to new environments that differ in a structured way from the training data (i.e., the case of dataset shift (Quiñonero-Candela et al., 2009)). Such methodology is increasingly important as ML systems are being deployed across a number of industries, such as health care and personal finance, in which system performance translates directly to real-world outcomes. Further, as regulation and product reviews become more common across industries, system developers will be expected to produce evidence of the validity and safety of their systems. For example, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) currently regulates ML systems for medical applications, requiring evidence for the validity of such systems before approval is granted (US Food and Drug Administration, 2019). Evaluation methods for assessing model validity have typically focused on how the model performs on data from the training distribution, known as internal validity. Powerful tools, such as cross-validation and the bootstrap, satisfy the assumption that the training and test data are drawn from the same distribution. However, these validation methods do not capture a model's ability to generalize to new environments, known as external validity (Campbell and Stanley, 1963). Currently, the main way to assess a model's external validity is to empirically evaluate performance on multiple, independently collected datasets (e.g.,

Recent advances in causal inference techniques, more specifically, in the theory of structural causal models, provide the framework for identification of causal effects from observational data in the cases where the causal graph is identifiable, i.e., the data generating mechanism can be recovered from the joint distribution. However, no such studies have been done to demonstrate this concept with a clinical example. We present a complete framework to estimate the causal effect from observational data by augmenting expert knowledge in the model development phase and with a practical clinical application. Our clinical application entails a timely and important research question, i.e., the effect of oxygen therapy intervention in the intensive care unit (ICU); the result of this project is useful in a variety of disease conditions, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) patients in the ICU. We used data from the MIMIC III database, a standard database in the machine learning community that contains 58,976 admissions from an ICU in Boston, MA, for estimating the oxygen therapy effect on morality. We also identified the covariate-specific effect to oxygen therapy from the model for more personalized intervention.

But two main contradictions remain: First, AI/ML are very heterogeneous, and Services for Cyber-Physical Systems based on Artificial each AI/ML method comes with a specialized model Intelligence and Machine Learning require formalism to capture relevant aspects of the environment a virtual representation of the physical. To reduce and the application domain. Hence, the modeling efforts and to synchronize results, for each question is how a DigitalTwin can provide the correct system, a common and unique virtual representation model to each AI/ML method. The second used by all services during the whole system contradiction is that AI/ML requires explicit, i.e. life-cycle is needed--i.e. a DigitalTwin. In this paper by an algorithm processable knowledge, since compiled such a DigitalTwin, namely the AI reference knowledge in form of simulation libraries, raw model AITwin, is defined. This reference model is data or executables does not help. But most publications verified by using a running example from process refer to these kind of information.

Turing machine and decision tree have developed independently for a long time. With the recent development of differentiable models, there is an intersection between them. Neural turing machine(NTM) opens door for the memory network. It use differentiable attention mechanism to read/write external memory bank. Differentiable forest brings differentiable properties to classical decision tree. In this short note, we show the deep connection between these two models. That is: differentiable forest is a special case of NTM. Differentiable forest is actually decision tree based neural turing machine. Based on this deep connection, we propose a response augmented differential forest (RaDF). The controller of RaDF is differentiable forest, the external memory of RaDF are response vectors which would be read/write by leaf nodes.

Individual Treatment Effect (ITE) estimation is an extensively researched problem, with applications in various domains. We model the case where there exists heterogeneous non-compliance to a randomly assigned treatment, a typical situation in health (because of non-compliance to prescription) or digital advertising (because of competition and ad blockers for instance). The lower the compliance, the more the effect of treatment prescription, or individual prescription effect (IPE), signal fades away and becomes hard to estimate. We propose a new approach for the estimation of the IPE that takes advantage of observed compliance information to prevent signal fading. Using the Structural Causal Model framework and do-calculus, we define a general mediated causal effect setting and propose a corresponding estimator which consistently recovers the IPE with asymptotic variance guarantees. Finally, we conduct experiments on both synthetic and real-world datasets that highlight the benefit of the approach, which consistently improves state-of-the-art in low compliance settings

Inferring the causal direction and causal effect between two discrete random variables X and Y from a finite sample is often a crucial problem and a challenging task. However, if we have access to observational and interventional data, it is possible to solve that task. If X is causing Y, then it does not matter if we observe an effect in Y by observing changes in X or by intervening actively on X. This invariance principle creates a link between observational and interventional distributions in a higher dimensional probability space. We embed distributions that originate from samples of X and Y into that higher dimensional space such that the embedded distribution is closest to the distributions that follow the invariance principle, with respect to the relative entropy. This allows us to calculate the best information-theoretic approximation for a given empirical distribution, that follows an assumed underlying causal model. We show that this information-theoretic approximation to causal models (IACM) can be done by solving a linear optimization problem. In particular, by approximating the empirical distribution to a monotonic causal model, we can calculate probabilities of causation. We can also use IACM for causal discovery problems in the bivariate, discrete case. However, experimental results on labeled synthetic data from additive noise models show that our causal discovery approach is lagging behind state-of-the-art approaches because the invariance principle encodes only a necessary condition for causal relations. Nevertheless, for synthetic multiplicative noise data and real-world data, our approach can compete in some cases with alternative methods.

Diagnosis of Parkinson's disease (PD) is commonly based on medical observations and assessment of clinical signs, including the characterization of a variety of motor symptoms. However, traditional diagnostic approaches may suffer from subjectivity as they rely on the evaluation of movements that are sometimes subtle to human eyes and therefore difficult to classify, leading to possible misclassification. In the meantime, early non-motor symptoms of PD may be mild and can be caused by many other conditions. Therefore, these symptoms are often overlooked, making diagnosis of PD at an early stage challenging. To address these difficulties and to refine the diagnosis and assessment procedures of PD, machine learning methods have been implemented for the classification of PD and healthy controls or patients with similar clinical presentations (e.g., movement disorders or other Parkinsonian syndromes). To provide a comprehensive overview of data modalities and machine learning methods that have been used in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of PD, in this study, we conducted a systematic literature review of studies published until February 14, 2020, using the PubMed and IEEE Xplore databases. A total of 209 studies were included, extracted for relevant information and presented in this systematic review, with an investigation of their aims, sources of data, types of data, machine learning methods and associated outcomes. These studies demonstrate a high potential for adaptation of machine learning methods and novel biomarkers in clinical decision making, leading to increasingly systematic, informed diagnosis of PD.

Language is a valuable source of clinical information in Alzheimer's Disease, as it declines concurrently with neurodegeneration. Consequently, speech and language data have been extensively studied in connection with its diagnosis. This paper summarises current findings on the use of artificial intelligence, speech and language processing to predict cognitive decline in the context of Alzheimer's Disease, detailing current research procedures, highlighting their limitations and suggesting strategies to address them. We conducted a systematic review of original research between 2000 and 2019, registered in PROSPERO (reference CRD42018116606). An interdisciplinary search covered six databases on engineering (ACM and IEEE), psychology (PsycINFO), medicine (PubMed and Embase) and Web of Science. Bibliographies of relevant papers were screened until December 2019. From 3,654 search results 51 articles were selected against the eligibility criteria. Four tables summarise their findings: study details (aim, population, interventions, comparisons, methods and outcomes), data details (size, type, modalities, annotation, balance, availability and language of study), methodology (pre-processing, feature generation, machine learning, evaluation and results) and clinical applicability (research implications, clinical potential, risk of bias and strengths/limitations). While promising results are reported across nearly all 51 studies, very few have been implemented in clinical research or practice. We concluded that the main limitations of the field are poor standardisation, limited comparability of results, and a degree of disconnect between study aims and clinical applications. Attempts to close these gaps should support translation of future research into clinical practice.