Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #943087. 	[Title] Theory and Practice of Vector Quantizers Trained on Small Training Sets [Abstract] We examine how the performance of a memoryless vector quantizer changes as a function of its training set size. Specifically, we study how well the training set distortion predicts test distortion when the training set is a randomly drawn subset of blocks from the test or training image(s). Using the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension, we derive formal bounds for the difference of test and training distortion of vector quantizer codebooks. We then describe extensive empirical simulations that test these bounds for a variety of bit rates and vector dimensions, and give practical suggestions for determining the training set size necessary to achieve good generalization from a codebook. We conclude that, by using training sets comprised of only a small fraction of the available data, one can produce results that are close to the results obtainable when all available data are used. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #41666. 	[Title] Separating Formal Bounds from Practical Performance in Learning Systems [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #23116. 	[Title] Bayesian Methods for Adaptive Models [Abstract]  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.

Paper #943087 has the title `Theory and Practice of Vector Quantizers Trained on Small Training Sets  
` and the abstract `We examine how the performance of a memoryless vector quantizer changes as a function of its training set size. Specifically, we study how well the training set distortion predicts test distortion when the training set is a randomly drawn subset of blocks from the test or training image(s). Using the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension, we derive formal bounds for the difference of test and training distortion of vector quantizer codebooks. We then describe extensive empirical simulations that test these bounds for a variety of bit rates and vector dimensions, and give practical suggestions for determining the training set size necessary to achieve good generalization from a codebook. We conclude that, by using training sets comprised of only a small fraction of the available data, one can produce results that are close to the results obtainable when all available data are used. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #943087 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #943087 has the title `Theory and Practice of Vector Quantizers Trained on Small Training Sets  
` and the abstract `We examine how the performance of a memoryless vector quantizer changes as a function of its training set size. Specifically, we study how well the training set distortion predicts test distortion when the training set is a randomly drawn subset of blocks from the test or training image(s). Using the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension, we derive formal bounds for the difference of test and training distortion of vector quantizer codebooks. We then describe extensive empirical simulations that test these bounds for a variety of bit rates and vector dimensions, and give practical suggestions for determining the training set size necessary to achieve good generalization from a codebook. We conclude that, by using training sets comprised of only a small fraction of the available data, one can produce results that are close to the results obtainable when all available data are used. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #943087 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