We derive an equivalence between AdaBoost and the dual of a convex optimization problem, showing that the only difference between minimizing theexponential loss used by AdaBoost and maximum likelihood for exponential models is that the latter requires the model to be normalized toform a conditional probability distribution over labels. In addition to establishing a simple and easily understood connection between the two methods, this framework enables us to derive new regularization procedures for boosting that directly correspond to penalized maximum likelihood. Experiments on UCI datasets support our theoretical analysis andgive additional insight into the relationship between boosting and logistic regression.

It has been noted by several authors that Belief Propagation can can also give impressive results for graphs that are not trees [2]. The Cluster Variation Method (CVM), is a method that has been developed in the physics community for approximate inference in the Ising model [3]. The CVM approximates thejoint probability distribution by a number of (overlapping) marginal distributions (clusters). The quality of the approximation is determined by the size and number of clusters. When the clusters consist of only two variables, the method is known as the Bethe approximation.

The mutual information of two random variables z and J with joint probabilities {7rij} is commonly used in learning Bayesian nets as well as in many other fields. The chances 7rij are usually estimated by the empirical sampling frequency nij In leading to a point estimate J(nijIn) for the mutual information. To answer questions like "is J (nij In) consistent with zero?" or "what is the probability that the true mutual information is much larger than the point estimate?"

Our analysis has shown the following: 1. As a function of an individual hyperparameter ai, £(a) has a unique maximum computable in closed-form.

Statistical learning and probabilistic inference techniques are used to infer thehand position of a subject from multi-electrode recordings of neural activityin motor cortex. First, an array of electrodes provides training dataof neural firing conditioned on hand kinematics. We learn a nonparametric representationof this firing activity using a Bayesian model and rigorously compare it with previous models using cross-validation. Second, we infer a posterior probability distribution over hand motion conditioned on a sequence of neural test data using Bayesian inference. The learned firing models of multiple cells are used to define a non-Gaussian likelihood term which is combined with a prior probability for the kinematics. A particle filtering method is used to represent, update, and propagate the posterior distribution over time. The approach is compared withtraditional linear filtering methods; the results suggest that it may be appropriate for neural prosthetic applications.

Multisensory response enhancement (MRE) is the augmentation of the response of a neuron to sensory input of one modality by simultaneous inputfrom another modality. The maximum likelihood (ML) model presented here modifies the Bayesian model for MRE (Anastasio et al.) by incorporating a decision strategy to maximize the number of correct decisions. Thus the ML model can also deal with the important tasks of stimulus discrimination and identification inthe presence of incongruent visual and auditory cues. It accounts for the inverse effectiveness observed in neurophysiological recordingdata, and it predicts a functional relation between uni-and bimodal levels of discriminability that is testable both in neurophysiological and behavioral experiments.

In this paper we explore two quantitative approaches to the modelling of counterfactual reasoning - a linear and a noisy-OR model - based on information containedin conceptual dependency networks. Empirical data is acquired in a study and the fit of the models compared to it. We conclude byconsidering the appropriateness of nonparametric approaches to counterfactual reasoning, and examining the prospects for other parametric approachesin the future.

A theory of categorization is presented in which knowledge of causal relationships between category features is represented as a Bayesian network. Referred to as causal-model theory, this theory predicts that objects are classified as category members to the extent they are likely to have been produced by a categorys causal model. On this view, people have models of the world that lead them to expect a certain distribution of features in category members (e.g., correlations between feature pairs that are directly connected by causal relationships), and consider exemplars good category members when they manifest those expectations. These expectations include sensitivity to higher-order feature interactions that emerge from the asymmetries inherent in causal relationships. Research on the topic of categorization has traditionally focused on the problem of learning new categories given observations of category members.

Narayanan and Jurafsky (1998) proposed that human language comprehension canbe modeled by treating human comprehenders as Bayesian reasoners, and modeling the comprehension process with Bayesian decision trees.In this paper we extend the Narayanan and Jurafsky model to make further predictions about reading time given the probability of difference parses or interpretations, and test the model against reading time data from a psycholinguistic experiment.

We are interested in the mechanisms by which individuals monitor and adjust their performance of simple cognitive tasks. We model a speeded discrimination task in which individuals are asked to classify a sequence of stimuli (Jones & Braver, 2001). Response conflict arises when one stimulus class is infrequent relative to another, resulting in more errors and slower reaction times for the infrequent class. How do control processes modulatebehavior based on the relative class frequencies? We explain performance from a rational perspective that casts the goal of individuals as minimizing a cost that depends both on error rate and reaction time.With two additional assumptions of rationality--that class prior probabilities are accurately estimated and that inference is optimal subject to limitations on rate of information transmission--we obtain a good fit to overall RT and error data, as well as trial-by-trial variations in performance.