Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #321861. 	[Title] Gambling in a rigged casino: The adversarial multi-armed bandit problem [Abstract] In the multi-armed bandit problem, a gambler must decide which arm of K non-identical slot machines to play in a sequence of trials so as to maximize his reward. This classical problem has received much attention because of the simple model it provides of the trade-off between exploration (trying out each arm to find the best one) and exploitation (playing the arm believed to give the best payoff). Past solutions for the bandit problem have almost always relied on assumptions about the statistics of the slot machines. In this work, we make no statistical assumptions whatsoever about the nature of the process generating the payoffs of the slot machines. We give a solution to the bandit problem in which an adversary, rather than a well-behaved stochastic process, has complete control over the payoffs. In a sequence of T plays, we prove that the expected per-round payoff of our algorithm approaches that of the best arm at the rate O(T 1=2 ), and we give an improved rate of convergence when the best arm has fairly low payoff. We also prove a general matching lower bound on the best possible performance of any algorithm in our setting. In addition, we consider a setting in which the player has a team of experts advising him on which arm to play; here, we give a strategy that will guarantee expected payoff close to that of the best expert. Finally, we apply our result to the problem of learning to play an unknown repeated matrix game against an all-powerful adversary. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #12165. 	[Title] The Power of Team Exploration: Two Robots Can Learn Unlabeled Directed Graphs [Abstract] We show that two cooperating robots can learn exactly any strongly-connected directed graph with n indistinguishable nodes in expected time polynomial in n. We introduce a new type of homing sequence for two robots, which helps the robots recognize certain previously-seen nodes. We then present an algorithm in which the robots learn the graph and the homing sequence simultaneously by actively wandering through the graph. Unlike most previous learning results using homing sequences, our algorithm does not require a teacher to provide counterexamples. Furthermore, the algorithm can use efficiently any additional information available that distinguishes nodes. We also present an algorithm in which the robots learn by taking random walks. The rate at which a random walk on a graph converges to the stationary distribution is characterized by the conductance of the graph. Our random-walk algorithm learns in expected time polynomial in n and in the inverse of the conductance and is more efficient than the homing-sequence algorithm for high-conductance graphs. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #102406. 	[Title] Learning Sparse Perceptrons [Abstract] We introduce a new algorithm designed to learn sparse perceptrons over input representations which include high-order features. Our algorithm, which is based on a hypothesis-boosting method, is able to PAC-learn a relatively natural class of target concepts. Moreover, the algorithm appears to work well in practice: on a set of three problem domains, the algorithm produces classifiers that utilize small numbers of features yet exhibit good generalization performance. Perhaps most importantly, our algorithm generates concept descriptions that are easy for humans to understand. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1119751. 	[Title] An Efficient Boosting Algorithm for Combining Preferences [Abstract] The problem of combining preferences arises in several applications, such as combining the results of different search engines. This work describes an efficient algorithm for combining multiple preferences. We first give a formal framework for the problem. We then describe and analyze a new boosting algorithm for combining preferences called RankBoost. We also describe an efficient implementation of the algorithm for a restricted case. We discuss two experiments we carried out to assess the performance of RankBoost. In the first experiment, we used the algorithm to combine different WWW search strategies, each of which is a query expansion for a given domain. For this task, we compare the performance of RankBoost to the individual search strategies. The second experiment is a collaborative-filtering task for making movie recommendations. Here, we present results comparing RankBoost to nearest-neighbor and regression algorithms. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #12182. 	[Title] How to Use Expert Advice (Extended Abstract) [Abstract] We analyze algorithms that predict a binary value by combining the predictions of several prediction strategies, called experts. Our analysis is for worst-case situations, i.e., we make no assumptions about the way the sequence of bits to be predicted is generated. We measure the performance of the algorithm by the difference between the expected number of mistakes it makes on the bit sequence and the expected number of mistakes made by the best expert on this sequence, where the expectation is taken with respect to the randomization in the predictions. We show that the minimum achievable difference is on the order of the square root of the number of mistakes of the best expert, and we give efficient algorithms that achieve this. Our upper and lower bounds have matching leading constants in most cases. We give implications of this result on the performance of batch learning algorithms in a PAC setting which improve on the best results currently known in this context. We also extend our analysis to the case in which log loss is used instead of the expected number of mistakes. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #197783. 	[Title] Adaptive Boosting of Neural Networks for Character Recognition [Abstract] Technical Report #1072, D epartement d'Informatique et Recherche Op erationnelle, Universit e de Montr eal Abstract Boosting is a general method for improving the performance of any learning algorithm that consistently generates classifiers which need to perform only slightly better than random guessing. A recently proposed and very promising boosting algorithm is AdaBoost [5]. It has been applied with great success to several benchmark machine learning problems using rather simple learning algorithms [4], in particular decision trees [1, 2, 6]. In this paper we use AdaBoost to improve the performances of neural networks applied to character recognition tasks. We compare training methods based on sampling the training set and weighting the cost function. Our system achieves about 1.4% error on a data base of online handwritten digits from more than 200 writers. Adaptive boosting of a multi-layer network achieved 2% error on the UCI Letters offline characters data set. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #350362. 	[Title] Improving Regressors using Boosting Techniques [Abstract] In the regression context, boosting and bagging are techniques to build a committee of regressors that may be superior to a single regressor. We use regression trees as fundamental building blocks in bagging committee machines and boosting committee machines. Performance is analyzed on three non-linear functions and the Boston housing database. In all cases, boosting is at least equivalent, and in most cases better than bagging in terms of prediction error. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1153183. 	[Title]  [Abstract] General convergence results for linear discriminant updates Abstract The problem of learning linear discriminant concepts can be solved by various mistake-driven update procedures, including the Winnow family of algorithms and the well-known Perceptron algorithm. In this paper we define the general class of quasi-additive algorithms, which includes Perceptron and Winnow as special cases. We give a single proof of convergence that covers much of this class, including both Perceptron and Winnow but also many novel algorithms. Our proof introduces a generic measure of progress that seems to capture much of when and how these algorithms converge. Using this measure, we develop a simple general technique for proving mistake bounds, which we apply to the new algorithms as well as existing algorithms. When applied to known algorithms, our technique automatically produces close variants of existing proofs (and we generally obtain the known bounds, to within constants) thus showing, in a certain sense, that these seem ingly diverse results are fundamentally isomorphic. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1117089. 	[Title] Dynamic Non-Bayesian Decision Making [Abstract] The model of a non-Bayesian agent who faces a repeated game with incomplete information against Nature is an appropriate tool for modeling general agent-environment interactions. In such a model the environment state (controlled by Nature) may change arbitrarily, and the feedback/reward function is initially unknown. The agent is not Bayesian, that is he does not form a prior probability neither on the state selection strategy of Nature, nor on his reward function. A policy for the agent is a function which assigns an action to every history of observations and actions. Two basic feedback structures are considered. In one of them the perfect monitoring case the agent is able to observe the previous environment state as part of his feedback, while in the other the imperfect monitoring case all that is available to the agent is the reward obtained. Both of these settings refer to partially observable processes, where the current environment state is unknown. Our main result refers to the competitive ratio criterion in the perfect monitoring case. We prove the existence of an efficient stochastic policy that ensures that the competitive ratio is obtained at almost all stages with an arbitrarily high probability, where efficiency is measured in terms of rate of convergence. It is further shown that such an optimal policy does not exist in the imperfect monitoring case. Moreover, it is proved that in the perfect monitoring case there does not exist a deterministic policy that satisfies our long run optimality criterion. In addition, we discuss the maxmin criterion and prove that a deterministic efficient optimal strategy does exist in the imperfect monitoring case under this criterion. Finally we show that our approach to long-run optimality can be viewed as qualitative, which distinguishes it from previous work in this area. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #59045. 	[Title] PREDICTION GAMES AND ARCING ALGORITHMS [Abstract] Technical Report 504 December 19, 1997 Statistics Department University of California Berkeley, CA. (4720 Abstract The theory behind the success of adaptive reweighting and combining algorithms (arcing) such as Adaboost (Freund and Schapire [1995].[1996]) and others in reducing generalization error has not been well understood. By formulating prediction, both classification and regression, as a game where one player makes a selection from instances in the training set and the other a convex linear combination of predictors from a finite set, existing arcing algorithms are shown to be algorithms for finding good game strategies. An optimal game strategy finds a combined predictor that minimizes the maximum of the error over the training set. A bound on the generalization error for the combined predictors in terms of their maximum error is proven that is sharper than bounds to date. Arcing algorithms are described that converge to the optimal strategy. Schapire et.al. [1997] offered an explanation of why Adaboost works in terms of its ability to reduce the margin. Comparing Adaboost to our optimal arcing algorithm shows that their explanation is not valid and that the answer lies elsewhere. In this situation the VC-type bounds are misleading. Some empirical results are given to explore the situation. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #107177. 	[Title] Learning to Order Things [Abstract] There are many applications in which it is desirable to order rather than classify instances. Here we consider the problem of learning how to order, given feedback in the form of preference judgments, i.e., statements to the effect that one instance should be ranked ahead of another. We outline a two-stage approach in which one first learns by conventional means a preference function, of the form PREF(u; v), which indicates whether it is advisable to rank u before v. New instances are then ordered so as to maximize agreements with the learned preference function. We show that the problem of finding the ordering that agrees best with a preference function is NP-complete, even under very restrictive assumptions. Nevertheless, we describe a simple greedy algorithm that is guaranteed to find a good approximation. We then discuss an on-line learning algorithm, based on the "Hedge" algorithm, for finding a good linear combination of ranking "experts." We use the ordering algorithm combined with the on-line learning algorithm to find a combination of "search experts," each of which is a domain-specific query expansion strategy for a WWW search engine, and present experimental results that demonstrate the merits of our approach. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1116842. 	[Title] Pruning Adaptive Boosting ICML-97 Final Draft [Abstract] The boosting algorithm AdaBoost, developed by Freund and Schapire, has exhibited outstanding performance on several benchmark problems when using C4.5 as the "weak" algorithm to be "boosted." Like other ensemble learning approaches, AdaBoost constructs a composite hypothesis by voting many individual hypotheses. In practice, the large amount of memory required to store these hypotheses can make ensemble methods hard to deploy in applications. This paper shows that by selecting a subset of the hypotheses, it is possible to obtain nearly the same levels of performance as the entire set. The results also provide some insight into the behavior of AdaBoost. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1118764. 	[Title] An Efficient Extension to Mixture Techniques for Prediction and Decision Trees [Abstract] We present a method for maintaining mixtures of prunings of a prediction or decision tree that extends the "node-based" prunings of [Bun90, WST95, HS97] to the larger class of edge-based prunings. The method includes an efficient online weight allocation algorithm that can be used for prediction, compression and classification. Although the set of edge-based prunings of a given tree is much larger than that of node-based prunings, our algorithm has similar space and time complexity to that of previous mixture algorithms for trees. Using the general on-line framework of Freund and Schapire [FS97], we prove that our algorithm maintains correctly the mixture weights for edge-based prunings with any bounded loss function. We also give a similar algorithm for the logarithmic loss function with a corresponding weight allocation algorithm. Finally, we describe experiments comparing node-based and edge-based mixture models for estimating the probability of the next word in English text, which show the ad vantages of edge-based models. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #5038. 	[Title] Using and combining predictors that specialize [Abstract] We study online learning algorithms that predict by combining the predictions of several subordinate prediction algorithms, sometimes called experts. These simple algorithms belong to the multiplicative weights family of algorithms. The performance of these algorithms degrades only logarithmically with the number of experts, making them particularly useful in applications where the number of experts is very large. However, in applications such as text categorization, it is often natural for some of the experts to abstain from making predictions on some of the instances. We show how to transform algorithms that assume that all experts are always awake to algorithms that do not require this assumption. We also show how to derive corresponding loss bounds. Our method is very general, and can be applied to a large family of online learning algorithms. We also give applications to various prediction models including decision graphs and switching experts. 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 #12211. 	[Title] Learning From a Population of Hypotheses [Abstract] We introduce a new formal model in which a learning algorithm must combine a collection of potentially poor but statistically independent hypothesis functions in order to approximate an unknown target function arbitrarily well. Our motivation includes the question of how to make optimal use of multiple independent runs of a mediocre learning algorithm, as well as settings in which the many hypotheses are obtained by a distributed population of identical learning agents. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #4660. 	[Title] Context-sensitive learning methods for text categorization [Abstract] Two recently implemented machine learning algorithms, RIPPER and sleeping experts for phrases, are evaluated on a number of large text categorization problems. These algorithms both construct classifiers that allow the "context" of a word w to affect how (or even whether) the presence or absence of w will contribute to a classification. However, RIPPER and sleeping experts differ radically in many other respects: differences include different notions as to what constitutes a context, different ways of combining contexts to construct a classifier, different methods to search for a combination of contexts, and different criteria as to what contexts should be included in such a combination. In spite of these differences, both RIPPER and sleeping experts perform extremely well across a wide variety of categorization problems, generally outperforming previously applied learning methods. We view this result as a confirmation of the usefulness of classifiers that represent contextual information. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1104055. 	[Title] LEARNING BY USING DYNAMIC FEATURE COMBINATION AND SELECTION [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #175291. 	[Title] Actively Searching for an Effective Neural-Network Ensemble [Abstract] A neural-network ensemble is a very successful technique where the outputs of a set of separately trained neural network are combined to form one unified prediction. An effective ensemble should consist of a set of networks that are not only highly correct, but ones that make their errors on different parts of the input space as well; however, most existing techniques only indirectly address the problem of creating such a set. We present an algorithm called Addemup that uses genetic algorithms to explicitly search for a highly diverse set of accurate trained networks. Addemup works by first creating an initial population, then uses genetic operators to continually create new networks, keeping the set of networks that are highly accurate while disagreeing with each other as much as possible. Experiments on four real-world domains show that Addemup is able to generate a set of trained networks that is more accurate than several existing ensemble approaches. Experiments also show that Addemup is able to effectively incorporate prior knowledge, if available, to improve the quality of its ensemble. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #157761. 	[Title] On the Complexity of Function Learning [Abstract] The majority of results in computational learning theory are concerned with concept learning, i.e. with the special case of function learning for classes of functions with range f0; 1g. Much less is known about the theory of learning functions with a larger range such as IN or IR. In particular relatively few results exist about the general structure of common models for function learning, and there are only very few nontrivial function classes for which positive learning results have been exhibited in any of these models. We introduce in this paper the notion of a binary branching adversary tree for function learning, which allows us to give a somewhat surprising equivalent characterization of the optimal learning cost for learning a class of real-valued functions (in terms of a max-min definition which does not involve any "learning" model). Another general structural result of this paper relates the cost for learning a union of function classes to the learning costs for the individual function classes. Furthermore, we exhibit an efficient learning algorithm for learning convex piecewise linear functions from IR d into IR. Previously, the class of linear functions from IR d into IR was the only class of functions with multi-dimensional domain that was known to be learnable within the rigorous framework of a formal model for on-line learning. Finally we give a sufficient condition for an arbitrary class F of functions from IR into IR that allows us to learn the class of all functions that can be written as the pointwise maximum of k functions from F . This allows us to exhibit a number of further nontrivial classes of functions from IR into IR for which there exist efficient learning algorithms. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1117249. 	[Title] Large Margin Classification Using the Perceptron Algorithm [Abstract] We introduce and analyze a new algorithm for linear classification which combines Rosenblatt's perceptron algorithm with Helmbold and Warmuth's leave-one-out method. Like Vapnik's maximal-margin classifier, our algorithm takes advantage of data that are linearly separable with large margins. Compared to Vapnik's algorithm, however, ours is much simpler to implement, and much more efficient in terms of computation time. We also show that our algorithm can be efficiently used in very high dimensional spaces using kernel functions. We performed some experiments using our algorithm, and some variants of it, for classifying images of handwritten digits. The performance of our algorithm is close to, but not as good as, the performance of maximal-margin classifiers on the same problem. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #4804. 	[Title] Toward Efficient Agnostic Learning [Abstract] In this paper we initiate an investigation of generalizations of the Probably Approximately Correct (PAC) learning model that attempt to significantly weaken the target function assumptions. The ultimate goal in this direction is informally termed agnostic learning, in which we make virtually no assumptions on the target function. The name derives from the fact that as designers of learning algorithms, we give up the belief that Nature (as represented by the target function) has a simple or succinct explanation. We give a number of positive and negative results that provide an initial outline of the possibilities for agnostic learning. Our results include hardness results for the most obvious generalization of the PAC model to an agnostic setting, an efficient and general agnostic learning method based on dynamic programming, relationships between loss functions for agnostic learning, and an algorithm for a learning problem that involves hidden variables. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1152075. 	[Title]  [Abstract] ARCING THE EDGE Leo Breiman Technical Report 486 , Statistics Department University of California, Berkeley CA. 94720 Abstract Recent work has shown that adaptively reweighting the training set, growing a classifier using the new weights, and combining the classifiers constructed to date can significantly decrease generalization error. Procedures of this type were called arcing by Breiman[1996]. The first successful arcing procedure was introduced by Freund and Schapire[1995,1996] and called Adaboost. In an effort to explain why Adaboost works, Schapire et.al. [1997] derived a bound on the generalization error of a convex combination of classifiers in terms of the margin. We introduce a function called the edge, which differs from the margin only if there are more than two classes. A framework for understanding arcing algorithms is defined. In this framework, we see that the arcing algorithms currently in the literature are optimization algorithms which minimize some function of the edge. A relation is derived between the optimal reduction in the maximum value of the edge and the PAC concept of weak learner. Two algorithms are described which achieve the optimal reduction. Tests on both synthetic and real data cast doubt on the Schapire et.al. There is recent empirical evidence that significant reductions in generalization error can be gotten by growing a number of different classifiers on the same training set and letting these vote for the best class. Freund and Schapire ([1995], [1996] ) proposed an algorithm called AdaBoost which adaptively reweights the training set in a way based on the past history of misclassifications, constructs a new classifier using the current weights, and uses the misclassification rate of this classifier to determine the size of its vote. In a number of empirical studies on many data sets using trees (CART or C4.5) as the base classifier (Drucker and Cortes[1995], Quinlan[1996], Freud and Schapire[1996], Breiman[1996]) AdaBoost produced dramatic decreases in generalization error compared to using a single tree. Error rates were reduced to the point where tests on some well-known data sets gave the result that CART plus AdaBoost did significantly better than any other of the commonly used classification methods (Breiman[1996] ). Meanwhile, empirical results showed that other methods of adaptive resampling (or reweighting) and combining (called "arcing" by Breiman [1996]) also led to low test set error rates. An algorithm called arc-x4 (Breiman[1996]) gave error rates almost identical to Adaboost. Ji and Ma[1997] worked with classifiers consisting of randomly selected hyperplanes and using a different method of adaptive resampling and unweighted voting, also got low error rates. Thus, there are a least three arcing algorithms extant, all of which give excellent classification accuracy. explanation. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #429781. 	[Title] Mistake-Driven Learning in Text Categorization [Abstract] Learning problems in the text processing domain often map the text to a space whose dimensions are the measured features of the text, e.g., its words. Three characteristic properties of this domain are (a) very high dimensionality, (b) both the learned concepts and the instances reside very sparsely in the feature space, and (c) a high variation in the number of active features in an instance. In this work we study three mistake-driven learning algorithms for a typical task of this nature - text categorization. We argue that these algorithms which categorize documents by learning a linear separator in the feature space have a few properties that make them ideal for this domain. We then show that a quantum leap in performance is achieved when we further modify the algorithms to better address some of the specific characteristics of the domain. In particular, we demonstrate (1) how variation in document length can be tolerated by either normalizing feature weights or by using negative weights, (2) the positive effect of applying a threshold range in training, (3) alternatives in considering feature frequency, and (4) the benefits of discarding features while training. Overall, we present an algorithm, a variation of Littlestone's Winnow, which performs significantly better than any other algorithm tested on this task using a similar feature set. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #28632. 	[Title] Universal Portfolios With and Without Transaction Costs [Abstract] A constant rebalanced portfolio is an investment strategy which keeps the same distribution of wealth among a set of stocks from period to period. Recently there has been work on on-line investment strategies that are competitive with the best constant rebalanced portfolio determined in hindsight (Cover, 1991; Helmbold et al., 1996; Cover and Ordentlich, 1996a; Cover and Ordentlich, 1996b; Ordentlich and Cover, 1996; Cover, 1996). For the universal algorithm of Cover (Cover, 1991), we provide a simple analysis which naturally extends to the case of a fixed percentage transaction cost (commission), answering a question raised in (Cover, 1991; Helmbold et al., 1996; Cover and Ordentlich, 1996a; Cover and Ordentlich, 1996b; Ordentlich and Cover, 1996; Cover, 1996). In addition, we present a simple randomized implementation that is significantly faster in practice. We conclude by explaining how these algorithms can be applied to other problems, such as combining the predictions of statistical language models, where the resulting guarantees are more striking. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #155736. 	[Title] Worst-case Quadratic Loss Bounds for Prediction Using Linear Functions and Gradient Descent [Abstract] In this paper we study the performance of gradient descent when applied to the problem of on-line linear prediction in arbitrary inner product spaces. We prove worst-case bounds on the sum of the squared prediction errors under various assumptions concerning the amount of a priori information about the sequence to predict. The algorithms we use are variants and extensions of on-line gradient descent. Whereas our algorithms always predict using linear functions as hypotheses, none of our results requires the data to be linearly related. In fact, the bounds proved on the total prediction loss are typically expressed as a function of the total loss of the best fixed linear predictor with bounded norm. All the upper bounds are tight to within constants. Matching lower bounds are provided in some cases. Finally, we apply our results to the problem of on-line prediction for classes of smooth functions. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #2653. 	[Title] A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an application to boosting how the weight-update rule [Abstract] We consider the problem of dynamically apportioning resources among a set of options in a worst-case on-line framework. The model we study can be interpreted as a broad, abstract extension of the well-studied on-line prediction model to a general decision-theoretic setting. We show that the multiplicative weight-update rule of Littlestone and Warmuth [10] can be adapted to this model yielding bounds that are slightly weaker in some cases, but applicable to a considerably more general class of learning problems. We show how the resulting learning algorithm can be applied to a variety of problems, including gambling, multiple-outcome prediction, repeated games and prediction of points in R n Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #28640. 	[Title] Predicting a binary sequence almost as well as the optimal biased coin [Abstract] We apply the exponential weight algorithm, introduced and Littlestone and Warmuth [17] and by Vovk [24] to the problem of predicting a binary sequence almost as well as the best biased coin. We first show that for the case of the logarithmic loss, the derived algorithm is equivalent to the Bayes algorithm with Jeffrey's prior, that was studied by Xie and Barron under probabilistic assumptions [26]. We derive a uniform bound on the regret which holds for any sequence. We also show that if the empirical distribution of the sequence is bounded away from 0 and from 1, then, as the length of the sequence increases to infinity, the difference between this bound and a corresponding bound on the average case regret of the same algorithm (which is asymptotically optimal in that case) is only 1=2. We show that this gap of 1=2 is necessary by calculating the regret of the min-max optimal algorithm for this problem and showing that the asymptotic upper bound is tight. We also study the application of this algorithm to the square loss and show that the algorithm that is derived in this case is different from the Bayes algorithm and is better than it for prediction in the worst-case. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #28641. 	[Title] Game Theory, On-line Prediction and Boosting [Abstract] We study the close connections between game theory, on-line prediction and boosting. After a brief review of game theory, we describe an algorithm for learning to play repeated games based on the on-line prediction methods of Littlestone and War-muth. The analysis of this algorithm yields a simple proof of von Neumann's famous minmax theorem, as well as a provable method of approximately solving a game. We then show that the on-line prediction model is obtained by applying this game-playing algorithm to an appropriate choice of game and that boosting is obtained by applying the same algorithm to the dual of this game. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #309476. 	[Title] Adaptive Mixtures of Probabilistic Transducers [Abstract] We describe and analyze a mixture model for supervised learning of probabilistic transducers. We devise an on-line learning algorithm that efficiently infers the structure and estimates the parameters of each probabilistic transducer in the mixture. Theoretical analysis and comparative simulations indicate that the learning algorithm tracks the best transducer from an arbitrarily large (possibly infinite) pool of models. We also present an application of the model for inducing a noun phrase recognizer. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #219239. 	[Title] Simulating Access to Hidden Information while Learning [Abstract] We introduce a new technique which enables a learner without access to hidden information to learn nearly as well as a learner with access to hidden information. We apply our technique to solve an open problem of Maass and Turan [18], showing that for any concept class F , the least number of queries sufficient for learning F by an algorithm which has access only to arbitrary equivalence queries is at most a factor of 1= log 2 (4=3) more than the least number of queries sufficient for learning F by an algorithm which has access to both arbitrary equivalence queries and membership queries. Previously known results imply that the 1= log 2 (4=3) in our bound is best possible. We describe analogous results for two generalizations of this model to function learning, and apply those results to bound the difficulty of learning in the harder of these models in terms of the difficulty of learning in the easier model. We bound the difficulty of learning unions of k concepts from a class F in terms of the difficulty of learning F . We bound the difficulty of learning in a noisy environment for deterministic algorithms in terms of the difficulty of learning in a noise-free environment. We apply a variant of our technique to develop an algorithm transformation that allows probabilistic learning algorithms to nearly optimally cope with noise. A second variant enables us to improve a general lower bound of Turan [19] for the PAC-learning model (with queries). Finally, we show that logarithmically many membership queries never help to obtain computationally efficient learning algorithms. fl Supported by Air Force Office of Scientific Research grant F49620-92-J-0515. Most of this work was done while this author was at TU Graz supported by a Lise Meitner Fellowship from the Fonds zur Forderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung (Austria). Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #167656. 	[Title] BOOSTING AND NAIVE BAYESIAN LEARNING [Abstract] Although so-called naive Bayesian classification makes the unrealistic assumption that the values of the attributes of an example are independent given the class of the example, this learning method is remarkably successful in practice, and no uniformly better learning method is known. Boosting is a general method of combining multiple classifiers due to Yoav Freund and Rob Schapire. This paper shows that boosting applied to naive Bayesian classifiers yields combination classifiers that are representationally equivalent to standard feedforward multilayer perceptrons. (An ancillary result is that naive Bayesian classification is a nonparametric, nonlinear generalization of logistic regression.) As a training algorithm, boosted naive Bayesian learning is quite different from backpropagation, and has definite advantages. Boosting requires only linear time and constant space, and hidden nodes are learned incrementally, starting with the most important. On the real-world datasets on which the method has been tried so far, generalization performance is as good as or better than the best published result using any other learning method. Unlike all other standard learning algorithms, naive Bayesian learning, with and without boosting, can be done in logarithmic time with a linear number of parallel computing units. Accordingly, these learning methods are highly plausible computationally as models of animal learning. Other arguments suggest that they are plausible behaviorally also. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #28649. 	[Title] ON-LINE LEARNING OF LINEAR FUNCTIONS [Abstract] We present an algorithm for the on-line learning of linear functions which is optimal to within a constant factor with respect to bounds on the sum of squared errors for a worst case sequence of trials. The bounds are logarithmic in the number of variables. Furthermore, the algorithm is shown to be optimally robust with respect to noise in the data (again to within a constant factor). Key words. Machine learning; computational learning theory; on-line learning; linear functions; worst-case loss bounds; adaptive filter theory. Subject classifications. 68T05. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1116268. 	[Title] The Sources of Increased Accuracy for Two Proposed Boosting Algorithms [Abstract] We introduce two boosting algorithms that aim to increase the generalization accuracy of a given classifier by incorporating it as a level-0 component in a stacked generalizer. Both algorithms construct a complementary level-0 classifier that can only generate coarse hypotheses for the training data. We show that the two algorithms boost generalization accuracy on a representative collection of data sets. The two algorithms are distinguished in that one of them modifies the class targets of selected training instances in order to train the complementary classifier. We show that the two algorithms achieve approximately equal generalization accuracy, but that they create complementary classifiers that display different degrees of accuracy and diversity. Our study provides evidence that it may be useful to investigate families of boosting algorithms that incorporate varying levels of accuracy and diversity, so as to achieve an appropriate mix for a given task and domain. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6125. 	[Title] Boosting a weak learning algorithm by majority To be published in Information and Computation [Abstract] We present an algorithm for improving the accuracy of algorithms for learning binary concepts. The improvement is achieved by combining a large number of hypotheses, each of which is generated by training the given learning algorithm on a different set of examples. Our algorithm is based on ideas presented by Schapire in his paper "The strength of weak learnability", and represents an improvement over his results. The analysis of our algorithm provides general upper bounds on the resources required for learning in Valiant's polynomial PAC learning framework, which are the best general upper bounds known today. We show that the number of hypotheses that are combined by our algorithm is the smallest number possible. Other outcomes of our analysis are results regarding the representational power of threshold circuits, the relation between learnability and compression, and a method for parallelizing PAC learning algorithms. We provide extensions of our algorithms to cases in which the concepts are not binary and to the case where the accuracy of the learning algorithm depends on the distribution of the instances. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1059953. 	[Title] WORST CASE PREDICTION OVER SEQUENCES UNDER LOG LOSS [Abstract] We consider the game of sequentially assigning probabilities to future data based on past observations under logarithmic loss. We are not making probabilistic assumptions about the generation of the data, but consider a situation where a player tries to minimize his loss relative to the loss of the (with hindsight) best distribution from a target class for the worst sequence of data. We give bounds on the minimax regret in terms of the metric entropies of the target class with respect to suitable distances between distributions. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1106418. 	[Title] Online Learning versus O*ine Learning [Abstract] We present an off-line variant of the mistake-bound model of learning. Just like in the well studied on-line model, a learner in the offline model has to learn an unknown concept from a sequence of elements of the instance space on which he makes "guess and test" trials. In both models, the aim of the learner is to make as few mistakes as possible. The difference between the models is that, while in the on-line model only the set of possible elements is known, in the off-line model the sequence of elements (i.e., the identity of the elements as well as the order in which they are to be presented) is known to the learner in advance. We give a combinatorial characterization of the number of mistakes in the off-line model. We apply this characterization to solve several natural questions that arise for the new model. First, we compare the mistake bounds of an off-line learner to those of a learner learning the same concept classes in the on-line scenario. We show that the number of mistakes in the on-line learning is at most a log n factor more than the off-line learning, where n is the length of the sequence. In addition, we show that if there is an off-line algorithm that does not make more than a constant number of mistakes for each sequence then there is an online algorithm that also does not make more than a constant number of mistakes. The second issue we address is the effect of the ordering of the elements on the number of mistakes of an off-line learner. It turns out that there are sequences on which an off-line learner can guarantee at most one mistake, yet a permutation of the same sequence forces him to err on many elements. We prove, however, that the gap, between the off-line mistake bounds on permutations of the same sequence of n-many elements, cannot be larger than a multiplicative factor of log n, and we present examples that obtain such a gap. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #65650. 	[Title] Machine Learning 27(1):51-68, 1997. Predicting nearly as well as the best pruning of a decision tree [Abstract] Many algorithms for inferring a decision tree from data involve a two-phase process: First, a very large decision tree is grown which typically ends up "over-fitting" the data. To reduce over-fitting, in the second phase, the tree is pruned using one of a number of available methods. The final tree is then output and used for classification on test data. In this paper, we suggest an alternative approach to the pruning phase. Using a given unpruned decision tree, we present a new method of making predictions on test data, and we prove that our algorithm's performance will not be "much worse" (in a precise technical sense) than the predictions made by the best reasonably small pruning of the given decision tree. Thus, our procedure is guaranteed to be competitive (in terms of the quality of its predictions) with any pruning algorithm. We prove that our procedure is very efficient and highly robust. Our method can be viewed as a synthesis of two previously studied techniques. First, we apply Cesa-Bianchi et al.'s [4] results on predicting using "expert advice" (where we view each pruning as an "expert") to obtain an algorithm that has provably low prediction loss, but that is com-putationally infeasible. Next, we generalize and apply a method developed by Buntine [3], [2] and Willems, Shtarkov and Tjalkens [20], [21] to derive a very efficient implementation of this procedure. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #94713. 	[Title] Update rules for parameter estimation in Bayesian networks [Abstract] This paper re-examines the problem of parameter estimation in Bayesian networks with missing values and hidden variables from the perspective of recent work in on-line learning [12]. We provide a unified framework for parameter estimation that encompasses both on-line learning, where the model is continuously adapted to new data cases as they arrive, and the more traditional batch learning, where a pre-accumulated set of samples is used in a one-time model selection process. In the batch case, our framework encompasses both the gradient projection algorithm [2, 3] and the EM algorithm [14] for Bayesian networks. The framework also leads to new on-line and batch parameter update schemes, including a parameterized version of EM. We provide both empirical and theoretical results indicating that parameterized EM allows faster convergence to the maximum likelihood parame ters than does standard EM. Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #321861 has the title `Gambling in a rigged casino: The adversarial multi-armed bandit problem  
` and the abstract `In the multi-armed bandit problem, a gambler must decide which arm of K non-identical slot machines to play in a sequence of trials so as to maximize his reward. This classical problem has received much attention because of the simple model it provides of the trade-off between exploration (trying out each arm to find the best one) and exploitation (playing the arm believed to give the best payoff). Past solutions for the bandit problem have almost always relied on assumptions about the statistics of the slot machines. In this work, we make no statistical assumptions whatsoever about the nature of the process generating the payoffs of the slot machines. We give a solution to the bandit problem in which an adversary, rather than a well-behaved stochastic process, has complete control over the payoffs. In a sequence of T plays, we prove that the expected per-round payoff of our algorithm approaches that of the best arm at the rate O(T 1=2 ), and we give an improved rate of convergence when the best arm has fairly low payoff. We also prove a general matching lower bound on the best possible performance of any algorithm in our setting. In addition, we consider a setting in which the player has a team of experts advising him on which arm to play; here, we give a strategy that will guarantee expected payoff close to that of the best expert. Finally, we apply our result to the problem of learning to play an unknown repeated matrix game against an all-powerful adversary.
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #321861 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #321861 has the title `Gambling in a rigged casino: The adversarial multi-armed bandit problem  
` and the abstract `In the multi-armed bandit problem, a gambler must decide which arm of K non-identical slot machines to play in a sequence of trials so as to maximize his reward. This classical problem has received much attention because of the simple model it provides of the trade-off between exploration (trying out each arm to find the best one) and exploitation (playing the arm believed to give the best payoff). Past solutions for the bandit problem have almost always relied on assumptions about the statistics of the slot machines. In this work, we make no statistical assumptions whatsoever about the nature of the process generating the payoffs of the slot machines. We give a solution to the bandit problem in which an adversary, rather than a well-behaved stochastic process, has complete control over the payoffs. In a sequence of T plays, we prove that the expected per-round payoff of our algorithm approaches that of the best arm at the rate O(T 1=2 ), and we give an improved rate of convergence when the best arm has fairly low payoff. We also prove a general matching lower bound on the best possible performance of any algorithm in our setting. In addition, we consider a setting in which the player has a team of experts advising him on which arm to play; here, we give a strategy that will guarantee expected payoff close to that of the best expert. Finally, we apply our result to the problem of learning to play an unknown repeated matrix game against an all-powerful adversary.
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #321861 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: Theory