Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6925. 	[Title] Solving the Multiple-Instance Problem with Axis-Parallel Rectangles [Abstract] The multiple instance problem arises in tasks where the training examples are ambiguous: a single example object may have many alternative feature vectors (instances) that describe it, and yet only one of those feature vectors may be responsible for the observed classification of the object. This paper describes and compares three kinds of algorithms that learn axis-parallel rectangles to solve the multiple-instance problem. Algorithms that ignore the multiple instance problem perform very poorly. An algorithm that directly confronts the multiple instance problem (by attempting to identify which feature vectors are responsible for the observed classifications) performs best, giving 89% correct predictions on a musk-odor prediction task. The paper also illustrates the use of artificial data to debug and compare these algorithms. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #235776. 	[Title] Recursive Automatic Algorithm Selection for Inductive Learning [Abstract] COINS Technical Report 94-61 August 1994 Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3218. 	[Title] Rule Induction with CN2: Some Recent Improvements [Abstract] The CN2 algorithm induces an ordered list of classification rules from examples using entropy as its search heuristic. In this short paper, we describe two improvements to this algorithm. Firstly, we present the use of the Laplacian error estimate as an alternative evaluation function and secondly, we show how unordered as well as ordered rules can be generated. We experimentally demonstrate significantly improved performances resulting from these changes, thus enhancing the usefulness of CN2 as an inductive tool. Comparisons with Quinlan's C4.5 are also made. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #69397. 	[Title] Dynamical Selection of Learning Algorithms [Abstract] Determining the conditions for which a given learning algorithm is appropriate is an open problem in machine learning. Methods for selecting a learning algorithm for a given domain have met with limited success. This paper proposes a new approach to predicting a given example's class by locating it in the "example space" and then choosing the best learner(s) in that region of the example space to make predictions. The regions of the example space are defined by the prediction patterns of the learners being used. The learner(s) chosen for prediction are selected according to their past performance in that region. This dynamic approach to learning algorithm selection is compared to other methods for selecting from multiple learning algorithms. The approach is then extended to weight rather than select the algorithms according to their past performance in a given region. Both approaches are further evaluated on a set of Determining the conditions for which a given learning algorithm is appropriate is an open problem in machine learning. Methods for selecting a learning algorithm for a given domain (e.g. [Aha92, Breiman84]) or for a portion of the domain ([Brodley93, Brodley94]) have met with limited success. This paper proposes a new approach that dynamically selects a learning algorithm for each example by locating it in the "example space" and then choosing the best learner(s) for prediction in that part of the example space. The regions of the example space are formed by the observed prediction patterns of the learners being used. The learner(s) chosen for prediction are selected according to their past performance in that region which is defined by the "cross-validation history." This paper introduces DS, a method for the dynamic selection of a learning algorithm(s). We call it "dynamic" because the learning algorithm(s) used to classify a novel example depends on that example. Preliminary experimentation motivated DW, an extension to DS that dynamically weights the learners predictions according to their regional accuracy. Further experimentation compares DS and DW to a collection of other meta-learning strategies such as cross-validation ([Breiman84]) and various forms of stacking ([Wolpert92]). In this phase of the experiementation, the meta-learners have six constituent learners which are heterogeneous in their search and representation methods (e.g. a rule learner, CN2 [Clark89]; a decision tree learner, C4.5 [Quinlan93]; an oblique decision tree learner, OC1 [Murthy93]; an instance-based learner, PEBLS [Cost93]; a k-nearest neighbor learner, ten domains and compared to several other meta-learning strategies. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6941. 	[Title] Multi-class problems and discretization in ICL Extended abstract [Abstract] Handling multi-class problems and real numbers is important in practical applications of machine learning to KDD problems. While attribute-value learners address these problems as a rule, very few ILP systems do so. The few ILP systems that handle real numbers mostly do so by trying out all real values that are applicable, thus running into efficiency or overfitting problems. This paper discusses some recent extensions of ICL that address these problems. ICL, which stands for Inductive Constraint Logic, is an ILP system that learns first order logic formulae from positive and negative examples. The main charateristic of ICL is its view on examples. These are seen as interpretations which are true or false for the clausal target theory (in CNF). We first argue that ICL can be used for learning a theory in a disjunctive normal form (DNF). With this in mind, a possible solution for handling more than two classes is given (based on some ideas from CN2). Finally, we show how to tackle problems with continuous values by adapting discretization techniques from attribute value learners. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1114526. 	[Title] Approximating Hyper-Rectangles: Learning and Pseudo-random Sets [Abstract] The PAC learning of rectangles has been studied because they have been found experimentally to yield excellent hypotheses for several applied learning problems. Also, pseudorandom sets for rectangles have been actively studied recently because (i) they are a subprob-lem common to the derandomization of depth-2 (DNF) circuits and derandomizing Randomized Logspace, and (ii) they approximate the distribution of n independent multivalued random variables. We present improved upper bounds for a class of such problems of approximating high-dimensional rectangles that arise in PAC learning and pseudorandomness. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #22563. 	[Title] A Comparative Study of ID3 and Backpropagation for English Text-to-Speech Mapping [Abstract] The performance of the error backpropagation (BP) and ID3 learning algorithms was compared on the task of mapping English text to phonemes and stresses. Under the distributed output code developed by Sejnowski and Rosenberg, it is shown that BP consistently out-performs ID3 on this task by several percentage points. Three hypotheses explaining this difference were explored: (a) ID3 is overfitting the training data, (b) BP is able to share hidden units across several output units and hence can learn the output units better, and (c) BP captures statistical information that ID3 does not. We conclude that only hypothesis (c) is correct. By augmenting ID3 with a simple statistical learning procedure, the performance of BP can be approached but not matched. More complex statistical procedures can improve the performance of both BP and ID3 substantially. A study of the residual errors suggests that there is still substantial room for improvement in learning methods for text-to-speech mapping. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #12210. 	[Title] Efficient Distribution-free Learning of Probabilistic Concepts [Abstract] In this paper we investigate a new formal model of machine learning in which the concept (boolean function) to be learned may exhibit uncertain or probabilistic behavior|thus, the same input may sometimes be classified as a positive example and sometimes as a negative example. Such probabilistic concepts (or p-concepts) may arise in situations such as weather prediction, where the measured variables and their accuracy are insufficient to determine the outcome with certainty. We adopt from the Valiant model of learning [27] the demands that learning algorithms be efficient and general in the sense that they perform well for a wide class of p-concepts and for any distribution over the domain. In addition to giving many efficient algorithms for learning natural classes of p-concepts, we study and develop in detail an underlying theory of learning p-concepts. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1106103. 	[Title] Bias and the Probability of Generalization [Abstract] In order to be useful, a learning algorithm must be able to generalize well when faced with inputs not previously presented to the system. A bias is necessary for any generalization, and as shown by several researchers in recent years, no bias can lead to strictly better generalization than any other when summed over all possible functions or applications. This paper provides examples to illustrate this fact, but also explains how a bias or learning algorithm can be better than another in practice when the probability of the occurrence of functions is taken into account. It shows how domain knowledge and an understanding of the conditions under which each learning algorithm performs well can be used to increase the probability of accurate generalization, and identifies several of the conditions that should be considered when attempting to select an appropriate bias for a particular problem. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1120444. 	[Title] Systematic Evaluation of Design Decisions in CBR Systems [Abstract] Two important goals in the evaluation of an AI theory or model are to assess the merit of the design decisions in the performance of an implemented computer system and to analyze the impact in the performance when the system faces problem domains with different characteristics. This is particularly difficult in case-based reasoning systems because such systems are typically very complex, as are the tasks and domains in which they operate. We present a methodology for the evaluation of case-based reasoning systems through systematic empirical experimentation over a range of system configurations and environmental conditions, coupled with rigorous statistical analysis of the results of the experiments. This methodology enables us to understand the behavior of the system in terms of the theory and design of the computational model, to select the best system configuration for a given domain, and to predict how the system will behave in response to changing domain and problem characteristics. A case study of a mul-tistrategy case-based and reinforcement learning system which performs autonomous robotic navigation is presented as an example. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6334. 	[Title] Prototype and Feature Selection by Sampling and Random Mutation Hill Climbing Algorithms [Abstract] With the goal of reducing computational costs without sacrificing accuracy, we describe two algorithms to find sets of prototypes for nearest neighbor classification. Here, the term prototypes refers to the reference instances used in a nearest neighbor computation the instances with respect to which similarity is assessed in order to assign a class to a new data item. Both algorithms rely on stochastic techniques to search the space of sets of prototypes and are simple to implement. The first is a Monte Carlo sampling algorithm; the second applies random mutation hill climbing. On four datasets we show that only three or four prototypes sufficed to give predictive accuracy equal or superior to a basic nearest neighbor algorithm whose run-time storage costs were approximately 10 to 200 times greater. We briefly investigate how random mutation hill climbing may be applied to select features and prototypes simultaneously. Finally, we explain the performance of the sampling algorithm on these datasets in terms of a statistical measure of the extent of clustering displayed by the target classes. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1118658. 	[Title] A Framework for Multiple-Instance Learning [Abstract] 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. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #57922. 	[Title] A Note on Learning from Multiple-Instance Examples [Abstract] We describe a simple reduction from the problem of PAC-learning from multiple-instance examples to that of PAC-learning with one-sided random classification noise. Thus, all concept classes learnable with one-sided noise, which includes all concepts learnable in the usual 2-sided random noise model plus others such as the parity function, are learnable from multiple-instance examples. We also describe a more efficient (and somewhat technically more involved) reduction to the Statistical-Query model that results in a polynomial-time algorithm for learning axis-parallel rectangles with sample complexity ~ O(d 2 r=* 2 ), saving roughly a factor of r over the results of Auer et al. (1997). Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #15429. 	[Title] A General Lower Bound on the Number of Examples Needed for Learning [Abstract] We prove a lower bound of ( 1 * ln 1 ffi + VCdim(C) * ) on the number of random examples required for distribution-free learning of a concept class C, where VCdim(C) is the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension and * and ffi are the accuracy and confidence parameters. This improves the previous best lower bound of ( 1 * ln 1 ffi + VCdim(C)), and comes close to the known general upper bound of O( 1 ffi + VCdim(C) * ln 1 * ) for consistent algorithms. We show that for many interesting concept classes, including kCNF and kDNF, our bound is actually tight to within a constant factor. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #57932. 	[Title] A Comparison of Dynamic Reposing and Tangent Distance for Drug Activity Prediction [Abstract] In drug activity prediction (as in handwritten character recognition), the features extracted to describe a training example depend on the pose (location, orientation, etc.) of the example. In handwritten character recognition, one of the best techniques for addressing this problem is the tangent distance method of Simard, LeCun and Denker (1993). Jain, et al. (1993a; 1993b) introduce a new technique|dynamic reposing|that also addresses this problem. Dynamic reposing iteratively learns a neural network and then reposes the examples in an effort to maximize the predicted output values. New models are trained and new poses computed until models and poses converge. This paper compares dynamic reposing to the tangent distance method on the task of predicting the biological activity of musk compounds. In a 20-fold cross-validation, Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #20821. 	[Title] Top-down Induction of Logical Decision Trees [Abstract] A first order framework for top-down induction of logical decision trees is introduced. Logical decision trees are more expressive than the flat logic programs typically induced by empirical inductive logic programming systems because logical decision trees introduce invented predicates and mix existential and universal quantification of variables. An implementation of the framework, the Tilde system, is presented and empirically evaluated. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #187354. 	[Title] Applying ILP to Diterpene Structure Elucidation from 13 C NMR Spectra [Abstract] We present a novel application of ILP to the problem of diterpene structure elucidation from 13 C NMR spectra. Diterpenes are organic compounds of low molecular weight that are based on a skeleton of 20 carbon atoms. They are of significant chemical and commercial interest because of their use as lead compounds in the search for new pharmaceutical effectors. The structure elucidation of diterpenes based on 13 C NMR spectra is usually done manually by human experts with specialized background knowledge on peak patterns and chemical structures. In the process, each of the 20 skeletal atoms is assigned an atom number that corresponds to its proper place in the skeleton and the diterpene is classified into one of the possible skeleton types. We address the problem of learning classification rules from a database of peak patterns for diterpenes with known structure. Recently, propositional learning was successfully applied to learn classification rules from spectra with assigned atom numbers. As the assignment of atom numbers is a difficult process in itself (and possibly indistinguishable from the classification process), we apply ILP, i.e., relational learning, to the problem of classifying spectra without assigned atom numbers. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #57948. 	[Title] PAC Learning Axis-aligned Rectangles with Respect to Product Distributions from Multiple-instance Examples [Abstract] We describe a polynomial-time algorithm for learning axis-aligned rectangles in Q d with respect to product distributions from multiple-instance examples in the PAC model. Here, each example consists of n elements of Q d together with a label indicating whether any of the n points is in the rectangle to be learned. We assume that there is an unknown product distribution D over Q d such that all instances are independently drawn according to D. The accuracy of a hypothesis is measured by the probability that it would incorrectly predict whether one of n more points drawn from D was in the rectangle to be learned. Our algorithm achieves accuracy * with probability 1 ffi in Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #42221. 	[Title] Composite Geometric Concepts and Polynomial Predictability [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6767. 	[Title] Generalizing from Case Studies: A Case Study [Abstract] Most empirical evaluations of machine learning algorithms are case studies evaluations of multiple algorithms on multiple databases. Authors of case studies implicitly or explicitly hypothesize that the pattern of their results, which often suggests that one algorithm performs significantly better than others, is not limited to the small number of databases investigated, but instead holds for some general class of learning problems. However, these hypotheses are rarely supported with additional evidence, which leaves them suspect. This paper describes an empirical method for generalizing results from case studies and an example application. This method yields rules describing when some algorithms significantly outperform others on some dependent measures. Advantages for generalizing from case studies and limitations of this particular approach are also described. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1114864. 	[Title] Machine Learning: An Annotated Bibliography for the 1995 AI Statistics Tutorial on Machine Learning (Version 1) [Abstract] This is a brief annotated bibliography that I wanted to make available to the attendees of my Machine Learning tutorial at the 1995 AI & Statistics Workshop. These slides are available in my WWW pages under slides. Please contact me if you have any questions. Please also note the date (listed above) on which this was most recently updated. While I plan to make occasional updates to this file, it is bound to be outdated quickly. Also, I apologize for the lack of figures, but my time on this project is limited and the slides should compensate. Finally, this bibliography is, by definition, This book is now out of date. Both Pat Langley and Tom Mitchell are in the process of writing textbooks on this subject, but we're still waiting for them. Until then, I suggest looking at both the Readings and the recent ML conference proceedings (both International and European). There are also a few introductory papers on this subject, though I haven't gotten around to putting them in here yet. However, Pat Langley and Dennis Kibler (1988) have written a good paper on ML as an empirical science, and Pat has written several editorials of use to the ML author (Langley 1986; 1987; 1990). incomplete, and I've left out many other references that may be of some use. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #372862. 	[Title] Lookahead and Discretization in ILP [Abstract] We present and evaluate two methods for improving the performance of ILP systems. One of them is discretization of numerical attributes, based on Fayyad and Irani's text [9], but adapted and extended in such a way that it can cope with some aspects of discretization that only occur in relational learning problems (when indeterminate literals occur). The second technique is lookahead. It is a well-known problem in ILP that a learner cannot always assess the quality of a refinement without knowing which refinements will be enabled afterwards, i.e. without looking ahead in the refinement lattice. We present a simple method for specifying when lookahead is to be used, and what kind of lookahead is interesting. Both the discretization and lookahead techniques are evaluated experimentally. The results show that both techniques improve the quality of the induced theory, while computational costs are acceptable. Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #6925 has the title `Solving the Multiple-Instance Problem with Axis-Parallel Rectangles  
` and the abstract `The multiple instance problem arises in tasks where the training examples are ambiguous: a single example object may have many alternative feature vectors (instances) that describe it, and yet only one of those feature vectors may be responsible for the observed classification of the object. This paper describes and compares three kinds of algorithms that learn axis-parallel rectangles to solve the multiple-instance problem. Algorithms that ignore the multiple instance problem perform very poorly. An algorithm that directly confronts the multiple instance problem (by attempting to identify which feature vectors are responsible for the observed classifications) performs best, giving 89% correct predictions on a musk-odor prediction task. The paper also illustrates the use of artificial data to debug and compare these algorithms. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #6925 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #6925 has the title `Solving the Multiple-Instance Problem with Axis-Parallel Rectangles  
` and the abstract `The multiple instance problem arises in tasks where the training examples are ambiguous: a single example object may have many alternative feature vectors (instances) that describe it, and yet only one of those feature vectors may be responsible for the observed classification of the object. This paper describes and compares three kinds of algorithms that learn axis-parallel rectangles to solve the multiple-instance problem. Algorithms that ignore the multiple instance problem perform very poorly. An algorithm that directly confronts the multiple instance problem (by attempting to identify which feature vectors are responsible for the observed classifications) performs best, giving 89% correct predictions on a musk-odor prediction task. The paper also illustrates the use of artificial data to debug and compare these algorithms. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #6925 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].

This paper should be classified into: Neural_Networks