The x-axis represents different samples belonged to eight classes.

The learning of appropriate distance metrics is a critical problem in image classification and retrieval.

The main contribution of this paper is to introduce the interesting idea of "activator" (or integrator) operating on multiple metrics. Depending on how this activator (kappa) is picked, one may recover some previously proposed multiple metric learning approaches or create new relevant ones such as those discussed in Section 2.1. The proposed algorithm/analysis is an application of stochastic proximal (sub)gradient descent and is thus not a significant contribution from the optimization point of view (and the presentation of the algorithm is actually quite confusing, see below). My main problem with the paper is the experimental section. I was expecting some experiments showing how the choice of kappa influences the type of metrics that are learned, with an analysis of why some choices are better suited to some kind of problems / datasets / networks.

Multi-task learning (MTL) improves the prediction performance on multiple, different but related, learning problems through shared parameters or representations. One of the most prominent multi-task learning algorithms is an extension to support vector machines (svm) by Evgeniou et al. [15]. Although very elegant, multi-task svm is inherently restricted by the fact that support vector machines require each class to be addressed explicitly with its own weight vector which, in a multi-task setting, requires the different learning tasks to share the same set of classes. This paper proposes an alternative formulation for multi-task learning by extending the recently published large margin nearest neighbor (lmnn) algorithm to the MTL paradigm. Instead of relying on separating hyperplanes, its decision function is based on the nearest neighbor rule which inherently extends to many classes and becomes a natural fit for multi-task learning. We evaluate the resulting multi-task lmnn on real-world insurance data and speech classification problems and show that it consistently outperforms single-task kNN under several metrics and state-of-the-art MTL classifiers.

We introduce an approach to learn discriminative visual representations while exploiting external semantic knowledge about object category relationships. Given a hierarchical taxonomy that captures semantic similarity between the objects, we learn a corresponding tree of metrics (ToM). In this tree, we have one metric for each non-leaf node of the object hierarchy, and each metric is responsible for discriminating among its immediate subcategory children. Specifically, a Mahalanobis metric learned for a given node must satisfy the appropriate (dis)similarity constraints generated only among its subtree members' training instances. To further exploit the semantics, we introduce a novel regularizer coupling the metrics that prefers a sparse disjoint set of features to be selected for each metric relative to its ancestor (supercategory) nodes' metrics. Intuitively, this reflects that visual cues most useful to distinguish the generic classes (e.g., feline vs. canine) should be different than those cues most useful to distinguish their component fine-grained classes (e.g., Persian cat vs. Siamese cat). We validate our approach with multiple image datasets using the WordNet taxonomy, show its advantages over alternative metric learning approaches, and analyze the meaning of attribute features selected by our algorithm.

The authors propose a model of similarity in which a binary similarity score between two vectors (u,v) is modeled as a noisy-or over a set of (learned) Mahalanobis distances. The motivation being that abstract "similarity" is often non-transitive, and is not well-modeled by a single, fixed distance metric over a vector space. Generally speaking, the paper is clearly written and the method makes intuitive sense. The algorithm seems to work in practice, although the experimental results could be expanded a bit to better illustrate the method. Overall, I enjoyed reading this paper.

Multi-task learning (MTL) improves the prediction performance on multiple, different but related, learning problems through shared parameters or representations. One of the most prominent multi-task learning algorithms is an extension to svms by Evgeniou et al. Although very elegant, multi-task svm is inherently restricted by the fact that support vector machines require each class to be addressed explicitly with its own weight vector which, in a multi-task setting, requires the different learning tasks to share the same set of classes. This paper proposes an alternative formulation for multi-task learning by extending the recently published large margin nearest neighbor (lmnn) algorithm to the MTL paradigm. Instead of relying on separating hyperplanes, its decision function is based on the nearest neighbor rule which inherently extends to many classes and becomes a natural fit for multitask learning.

Multi-task learning (MTL) improves the prediction performance on multiple, different but related, learning problems through shared parameters or representations. One of the most prominent multi-task learning algorithms is an extension to svms by Evgeniou et al. Although very elegant, multi-task svm is inherently restricted by the fact that support vector machines require each class to be addressed explicitly with its own weight vector which, in a multi-task setting, requires the different learning tasks to share the same set of classes. This paper proposes an alternative formulation for multi-task learning by extending the recently published large margin nearest neighbor (lmnn) algorithm to the MTL paradigm. Instead of relying on separating hyperplanes, its decision function is based on the nearest neighbor rule which inherently extends to many classes and becomes a natural fit for multitask learning.

$K$-NN classifier is one of the most famous classification algorithms, whose performance is crucially dependent on the distance metric. When we consider the distance metric as a parameter of $K$-NN, learning an appropriate distance metric for $K$-NN can be seen as minimizing the empirical risk of $K$-NN. In this paper, we design a new type of continuous decision function of the $K$-NN classification rule which can be used to construct the continuous empirical risk function of $K$-NN. By minimizing this continuous empirical risk function, we obtain a novel distance metric learning algorithm named as adaptive nearest neighbor (ANN). We have proved that the current algorithms such as the large margin nearest neighbor (LMNN), neighbourhood components analysis (NCA) and the pairwise constraint methods are special cases of the proposed ANN by setting the parameter different values. Compared with the LMNN, NCA, and pairwise constraint methods, our method has a broader searching space which may contain better solutions. At last, extensive experiments on various data sets are conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed method.

Machine learning qualifies computers to assimilate with data, without being solely programmed [1, 2]. Machine learning can be classified as supervised and unsupervised learning. In supervised learning, computers learn an objective that portrays an input to an output hinged on training input-output pairs [3]. Most efficient and widely used supervised learning algorithms are K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Large Margin Nearest Neighbor (LMNN), and Extended Nearest Neighbor (ENN). The main contribution of this paper is to implement these elegant learning algorithms on eleven different datasets from the UCI machine learning repository to observe the variation of accuracies for each of the algorithms on all datasets. Analyzing the accuracy of the algorithms will give us a brief idea about the relationship of the machine learning algorithms and the data dimensionality. All the algorithms are developed in Matlab. Upon such accuracy observation, the comparison can be built among KNN, SVM, LMNN, and ENN regarding their performances on each dataset.