Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1110531. 	[Title] Computational Learning in Humans and Machines [Abstract] In this paper we review research on machine learning and its relation to computational models of human learning. We focus initially on concept induction, examining five main approaches to this problem, then consider the more complex issue of learning sequential behaviors. After this, we compare the rhetoric that sometimes appears in the machine learning and psychological literature with the growing evidence that different theoretical paradigms typically produce similar results. In response, we suggest that concrete computational models, which currently dominate the field, may be less useful than simulations that operate at a more abstract level. We illustrate this point with an abstract simulation that explains a challenging phenomenon in the area of category learning, and we conclude with some general observations about such abstract models. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3233. 	[Title] A Study of Cross-Validation and Bootstrap for Accuracy Estimation and Model Selection [Abstract] We review accuracy estimation methods and compare the two most common methods: cross-validation and bootstrap. Recent experimental results on artificial data and theoretical results in restricted settings have shown that for selecting a good classifier from a set of classifiers (model selection), ten-fold cross-validation may be better than the more expensive leave-one-out cross-validation. We report on a large-scale experiment|over half a million runs of C4.5 and a Naive-Bayes algorithm|to estimate the effects of different parameters on these algorithms on real-world datasets. For cross-validation, we vary the number of folds and whether the folds are stratified or not; for bootstrap, we vary the number of bootstrap samples. Our results indicate that for real-word datasets similar to ours, the best method to use for model selection is ten-fold stratified cross validation, even if computation power allows using more folds. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #95586. 	[Title] Roles of Macro-Actions in Accelerating Reinforcement Learning [Abstract] We analyze the use of built-in policies, or macro-actions, as a form of domain knowledge that can improve the speed and scaling of reinforcement learning algorithms. Such macro-actions are often used in robotics, and macro-operators are also well-known as an aid to state-space search in AI systems. The macro-actions we consider are closed-loop policies with termination conditions. The macro-actions can be chosen at the same level as primitive actions. Macro-actions commit the learning agent to act in a particular, purposeful way for a sustained period of time. Overall, macro-actions may either accelerate or retard learning, depending on the appropriateness of the macro-actions to the particular task. We analyze their effect in a simple example, breaking the acceleration effect into two parts: 1) the effect of the macro-action in changing exploratory behavior, independent of learning, and 2) the effect of the macro-action on learning, independent of its effect on behavior. In our example, both effects are significant, but the latter appears to be larger. Finally, we provide a more complex gridworld illustration of how appropriately chosen macro-actions can accelerate overall learning. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1131137. 	[Title] Mining and Model Simplicity: A Case Study in Diagnosis [Abstract] Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD), 1996. The official version of this paper has been published by the American Association for Artificial Intelligence (http://www.aaai.org) c fl 1996, American Association for Artificial Intelligence. All rights reserved. Abstract We describe the results of performing data mining on a challenging medical diagnosis domain, acute abdominal pain. This domain is well known to be difficult, yielding little more than 60% predictive accuracy for most human and machine diagnosticians. Moreover, many researchers argue that one of the simplest approaches, the naive Bayesian classifier, is optimal. By comparing the performance of the naive Bayesian classifier to its more general cousin, the Bayesian network classifier, and to selective Bayesian classifiers with just 10% of the total attributes, we show that the simplest models perform at least as well as the more complex models. We argue that simple models like the selective naive Bayesian classifier will perform as well as more complicated models for similarly complex domains with relatively small data sets, thereby calling into question the extra expense necessary to induce more complex models. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #97377. 	[Title] Induction of One-Level Decision Trees [Abstract] In recent years, researchers have made considerable progress on the worst-case analysis of inductive learning tasks, but for theoretical results to have impact on practice, they must deal with the average case. In this paper we present an average-case analysis of a simple algorithm that induces one-level decision trees for concepts defined by a single relevant attribute. Given knowledge about the number of training instances, the number of irrelevant attributes, the amount of class and attribute noise, and the class and attribute distributions, we derive the expected classification accuracy over the entire instance space. We then examine the predictions of this analysis for different settings of these domain parameters, comparing them to exper imental results to check our reasoning. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #114308. 	[Title] The Role of Forgetting in Learning [Abstract] This paper is a discussion of the relationship between learning and forgetting. An analysis of the economics of learning is carried out and it is argued that knowledge can sometimes have a negative value. A series of experiments involving a program which learns to traverse state spaces is described. It is shown that most of the knowledge acquired is of negative value even though it is correct and was acquired solving similar problems. It is shown that the value of the knowledge depends on what else is known and that random forgetting can sometimes lead to substantial improvements in performance. It is concluded that research into knowledge acquisition should take seriously the possibility that knowledge may sometimes be harmful. The view is taken that learning and forgetting are complementary processes which construct and maintain useful representations of experience. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #64519. 	[Title] Utilization Filtering a method for reducing the inherent harmfulness of deductively learned knowledge field of [Abstract] This paper highlights a phenomenon that causes deductively learned knowledge to be harmful when used for problem solving. The problem occurs when deductive problem solvers encounter a failure branch of the search tree. The backtracking mechanism of such problem solvers will force the program to traverse the whole subtree thus visiting many nodes twice - once by using the deductively learned rule and once by using the rules that generated the learned rule in the first place. We suggest an approach called utilization filtering to solve that problem. Learners that use this approach submit to the problem solver a filter function together with the knowledge that was acquired. The function decides for each problem whether to use the learned knowledge and what part of it to use. We have tested the idea in the context of a lemma learning system, where the filter uses the probability of a subgoal failing to decide whether to turn lemma usage off. Experiments show an improvement of performance by a factor of 3. This paper is concerned with a particular type of harmful redundancy that occurs in deductive problem solvers that employ backtracking in their search procedure, and use deductively learned knowledge to accelerate the search. The problem is that in failure branches of the search tree, the backtracking mechanism of the problem solver forces exploration of the whole subtree. Thus, the search procedure will visit many states twice - once by using the deductively learned rule, and once by using the search path that produced the rule in the first place. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3240. 	[Title] An Analysis of Bayesian Classifiers (1988), involves the formulation of average-case models for specific algorithms [Abstract] In this paper we present an average-case analysis of the Bayesian classifier, a simple induction algorithm that fares remarkably well on many learning tasks. Our analysis assumes a monotone conjunctive target concept, and independent, noise-free Boolean attributes. We calculate the probability that the algorithm will induce an arbitrary pair of concept descriptions and then use this to compute the probability of correct classification over the instance space. The analysis takes into account the number of training instances, the number of attributes, the distribution of these attributes, and the level of class noise. We also explore the behavioral implications of the analysis by presenting predicted learning curves for artificial domains, and give experimental results on these domains as a check on our reasoning. One goal of research in machine learning is to discover principles that relate algorithms and domain characteristics to behavior. To this end, many researchers have carried out systematic experimentation with natural and artificial domains in search of empirical regularities (e.g., Kibler & Langley, 1988). Others have focused on theoretical analyses, often within the paradigm of probably approximately correct learning (e.g., Haus-sler, 1990). However, most experimental studies are based only on informal analyses of the learning task, whereas most formal analyses address the worst case, and thus bear little relation to empirical results. ber of attributes, and the class and attribute frequencies, they obtain predictions about the behavior of induction algorithms and used experiments to check their analyses. 1 However, their research does not focus on algorithms typically used by the experimental and practical sides of machine learning, and it is important that average-case analyses be extended to such methods. Recently, there has been growing interest in probabilistic approaches to inductive learning. For example, Fisher (1987) has described Cobweb, an incremental algorithm for conceptual clustering that draws heavily on Bayesian ideas, and the literature reports a number of systems that build on this work (e.g., Allen & Lang-ley, 1990; Iba & Gennari, 1991; Thompson & Langley, 1991). Cheeseman et al. (1988) have outlined Auto-Class, a nonincremental system that uses Bayesian methods to cluster instances into groups, and other researchers have focused on the induction of Bayesian inference networks (e.g., Cooper & Kerskovits, 1991). These recent Bayesian learning algorithms are complex and not easily amenable to analysis, but they share a common ancestor that is simpler and more tractable. This supervised algorithm, which we refer to simply as a Bayesian classifier, comes originally from work in pattern recognition (Duda & Hart, 1973). The method stores a probabilistic summary for each class; this summary contains the conditional probability of each attribute value given the class, as well as the probability (or base rate) of the class. This data structure approximates the representational power of a perceptron; it describes a single decision boundary through the instance space. When the algorithm encounters a new instance, it updates the probabilities stored with the specified class. Neither the order of training instances nor the occurrence of classification errors have any effect on this process. When given a test instance, the classifier uses an evaluation function (which we describe in detail later) to rank the alter Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #36620. 	[Title] Towards a Better Understanding of Memory-Based Reasoning Systems [Abstract] We quantify both experimentally and analytically the performance of memory-based reasoning (MBR) algorithms. To start gaining insight into the capabilities of MBR algorithms, we compare an MBR algorithm using a value difference metric to a popular Bayesian classifier. These two approaches are similar in that they both make certain independence assumptions about the data. However, whereas MBR uses specific cases to perform classification, Bayesian methods summarize the data probabilistically. We demonstrate that a particular MBR system called Pebls works comparatively well on a wide range of domains using both real and artificial data. With respect to the artificial data, we consider distributions where the concept classes are separated by functional discriminants, as well as time-series data generated by Markov models of varying complexity. Finally, we show formally that Pebls can learn (in the limit) natural concept classes that the Bayesian classifier cannot learn, and that it will attain perfect accuracy whenever Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #37998. 	[Title] Combining Top-down and Bottom-up Techniques in Inductive Logic Programming [Abstract] This paper describes a new method for inducing logic programs from examples which attempts to integrate the best aspects of existing ILP methods into a single coherent framework. In particular, it combines a bottom-up method similar to Golem with a top-down method similar to Foil. It also includes a method for predicate invention similar to Champ and an elegant solution to the "noisy oracle" problem which allows the system to learn recursive programs without requiring a complete set of positive examples. Systematic experimental comparisons to both Golem and Foil on a range of problems are used to clearly demonstrate the ad vantages of the approach. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #38000. 	[Title] on Inductive Logic Programming (ILP-95) Inducing Logic Programs without Explicit Negative Examples [Abstract] This paper presents a method for learning logic programs without explicit negative examples by exploiting an assumption of output completeness. A mode declaration is supplied for the target predicate and each training input is assumed to be accompanied by all of its legal outputs. Any other outputs generated by an incomplete program implicitly represent negative examples; however, large numbers of ground negative examples never need to be generated. This method has been incorporated into two ILP systems, Chillin and IFoil, both of which use intensional background knowledge. Tests on two natural language acquisition tasks, case-role mapping and past-tense learning, illustrate the advantages of the approach. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #63835. 	[Title] A Heuristic Approach to the Discovery of Macro-operators. Machine Learning, 3, 285-317. L e a [Abstract] The negative effect is naturally more significant in the more complex domain. The graph for the simple domain crosses the 0 line earlier than the complex domain. That means that learning starts to be useful with weight greater than 0.6 for the simple domain and 0.7 for the complex domain. As we relax the optimality requirement more s i g n i f i c a n t l y ( w i t h a W = 0.8), macro usage in the more complex domain becomes more advantageous. The purpose of the research described in this paper is to identify the parameters that effects deductive learning and to perform experiments systematically in order to understand the nature of those effects. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate the methodology of performing parametric experimental study of deductive learning. The example here include the study of two parameters: the point on the satisficing-optimizing scale that is used during the search carried out during problem solving time and during learning time. We showed that A*, which looks for optimal solutions, cannot benefit from macro learning but as the strategy comes closer to best-first (satisficing search), the utility of macros increases. We also demonstrated that deductive learners that learn offline by solving training problems are sensitive to the type of search used during the learning. We showed that in general optimizing search is best for learning. It generates macros that increase the quality solutions regardless of the search method used during problem solving. It also improves the efficiency for problem solvers that require a high level of optimality. The only drawback in using optimizing search is the increase in learning resources spent. We are aware of the fact that the results described here are not very surprising. The goal of the parametric study is not necessarily to find exciting results, but to obtain results, sometimes even previously known, in a controlled experimental environment. The work described here is only part of our research plan. We are currently in the process of extensive experimentation with all the parameters described here and also with others. We also intend to test the validity of the conclusions reached during the study by repeating some of the tests in several of the commonly known search problems. We hope that such systematic experimentation will help the research community to better understand the process of deductive learning and will serve as a demonstration of the experimental methodology that should be used in machine learning research. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #23507. 	[Title] Natural Language Processing with Subsymbolic Neural Networks [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #13717. 	[Title] Learning Semantic Grammars with Constructive Inductive Logic Programming [Abstract] Automating the construction of semantic grammars is a difficult and interesting problem for machine learning. This paper shows how the semantic-grammar acquisition problem can be viewed as the learning of search-control heuristics in a logic program. Appropriate control rules are learned using a new first-order induction algorithm that automatically invents useful syntactic and semantic categories. Empirical results show that the learned parsers generalize well to novel sentences and out-perform previous approaches based on connectionist techniques. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #964248. 	[Title] Issues in the Integration of Data Mining and Data Visualization Visualizing the Simple Bayesian Classifier [Abstract] The simple Bayesian classifier (SBC), sometimes called Naive-Bayes, is built based on a conditional independence model of each attribute given the class. The model was previously shown to be surprisingly robust to obvious violations of this independence assumption, yielding accurate classification models even when there are clear conditional dependencies. The SBC can serve as an excellent tool for initial exploratory data analysis when coupled with a visualizer that makes its structure comprehensible. We describe such a visual representation of the SBC model that has been successfully implemented. We describe the requirements we had for such a visualization and the design decisions we made to satisfy them. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #39130. 	[Title] Average-Case Analysis of a Nearest Neighbor Algorithm [Abstract] In this paper we present an average-case analysis of the nearest neighbor algorithm, a simple induction method that has been studied by many researchers. Our analysis assumes a conjunctive target concept, noise-free Boolean attributes, and a uniform distribution over the instance space. We calculate the probability that the algorithm will encounter a test instance that is distance d from the prototype of the concept, along with the probability that the nearest stored training case is distance e from this test instance. From this we compute the probability of correct classification as a function of the number of observed training cases, the number of relevant attributes, and the number of irrelevant attributes. We also explore the behavioral implications of the analysis by presenting predicted learning curves for artificial domains, and give experimental results on these domains as a check on our reasoning. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #63931. 	[Title] Combining FOIL and EBG to Speed-up Logic Programs [Abstract] This paper presents an algorithm that combines traditional EBL techniques and recent developments in inductive logic programming to learn effective clause selection rules for Prolog programs. When these control rules are incorporated into the original program, significant speed-up may be achieved. The algorithm is shown to be an improvement over competing EBL approaches in several domains. Additionally, the algorithm is capable of automatically transforming some intractable algorithms into ones that run in polynomial time. Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #1110531 has the title `Computational Learning in Humans and Machines  
` and the abstract `In this paper we review research on machine learning and its relation to computational models of human learning. We focus initially on concept induction, examining five main approaches to this problem, then consider the more complex issue of learning sequential behaviors. After this, we compare the rhetoric that sometimes appears in the machine learning and psychological literature with the growing evidence that different theoretical paradigms typically produce similar results. In response, we suggest that concrete computational models, which currently dominate the field, may be less useful than simulations that operate at a more abstract level. We illustrate this point with an abstract simulation that explains a challenging phenomenon in the area of category learning, and we conclude with some general observations about such abstract models. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #1110531 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #1110531 has the title `Computational Learning in Humans and Machines  
` and the abstract `In this paper we review research on machine learning and its relation to computational models of human learning. We focus initially on concept induction, examining five main approaches to this problem, then consider the more complex issue of learning sequential behaviors. After this, we compare the rhetoric that sometimes appears in the machine learning and psychological literature with the growing evidence that different theoretical paradigms typically produce similar results. In response, we suggest that concrete computational models, which currently dominate the field, may be less useful than simulations that operate at a more abstract level. We illustrate this point with an abstract simulation that explains a challenging phenomenon in the area of category learning, and we conclude with some general observations about such abstract models. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #1110531 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: Case_Based