Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #154134. 	[Title] Simple Selection of Utile Control Rules in Speedup Learning [Abstract] Many recent approaches to avoiding the utility problem in speedup learning rely on sophisticated utility measures and significant numbers of training data to accurately estimate the utility of control knowledge. Empirical results presented here and elsewhere indicate that a simple selection strategy of retaining all control rules derived from a training problem explanation quickly defines an efficient set of control knowledge from few training problems. This simple selection strategy provides a low-cost alternative to example-intensive approaches for improving the speed of a problem solver. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1107140. 	[Title] A Formal Framework for Speedup Learning from Problems and Solutions [Abstract] Speedup learning seeks to improve the computational efficiency of problem solving with experience. In this paper, we develop a formal framework for learning efficient problem solving from random problems and their solutions. We apply this framework to two different representations of learned knowledge, namely control rules and macro-operators, and prove theorems that identify sufficient conditions for learning in each representation. Our proofs are constructive in that they are accompanied with learning algorithms. Our framework captures both empirical and explanation-based speedup learning in a unified fashion. We illustrate our framework with implementations in two domains: symbolic integration and Eight Puzzle. This work integrates many strands of experimental and theoretical work in machine learning, including empirical learning of control rules, macro-operator learning, Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #11335. 	[Title] Concept Learning and the Problem of Small [Abstract]  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 #10186. 	[Title] Learning Default Concepts [Abstract] Classical concepts, based on necessary and sufficient defining conditions, cannot classify logically insufficient object descriptions. Many reasoning systems avoid this limitation by using "default concepts" to classify incompletely described objects. We address the task of learning such default concepts from observational data. We model the underlying performance task | classifying incomplete examples | by a probabilistic process where random test examples are passed through a "blocker" that can hide object attributes from the classifier. We then address the task of learning accurate default concepts from random training examples. We survey the learning techniques that have been proposed for this task in the machine learning and knowledge representation literatures, investigate the relative merits of each, and show that a superior learning technique can be developed from well known statistical principles. Finally, we extend Valiant's pac-learning framework to this context and obtain a number of useful learnability results. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1130539. 	[Title] Learning High Utility Rules by Incorporating Search Control  Guidance Committee [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3084. 	[Title] A Comparative Utility Analysis of Case-Based Reasoning and Control-Rule Learning Systems [Abstract] The utility problem in learning systems occurs when knowledge learned in an attempt to improve a system's performance degrades performance instead. We present a methodology for the analysis of utility problems which uses computational models of problem solving systems to isolate the root causes of a utility problem, to detect the threshold conditions under which the problem will arise, and to design strategies to eliminate it. We present models of case-based reasoning and control-rule learning systems and compare their performance with respect to the swamping utility problem. Our analysis suggests that case-based reasoning systems are more resistant to the utility problem than control-rule learning systems. 1 Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #37483. 	[Title] Learning Approximate Control Rules Of High Utility [Abstract] One of the difficult problems in the area of explanation based learning is the utility problem; learning too many rules of low utility can lead to swamping, or degradation of performance. This paper introduces two new techniques for improving the utility of learned rules. The first technique is to combine EBL with inductive learning techniques to learn a better set of control rules; the second technique is to use these inductive techniques to learn approximate control rules. The two techniques are synthesized in an algorithm called approximating abductive explanation based learning (AxA-EBL). AxA-EBL is shown to improve substantially over standard EBL in several domains. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #2354. 	[Title] A Statistical Approach to Solving the EBL Utility Problem [Abstract] Many "learning from experience" systems use information extracted from problem solving experiences to modify a performance element PE, forming a new element PE 0 that can solve these and similar problems more efficiently. However, as transformations that improve performance on one set of problems can degrade performance on other sets, the new PE 0 is not always better than the original PE; this depends on the distribution of problems. We therefore seek the performance element whose expected performance, over this distribution, is optimal. Unfortunately, the actual distribution, which is needed to determine which element is optimal, is usually not known. Moreover, the task of finding the optimal element, even knowing the distribution, is intractable for most interesting spaces of elements. This paper presents a method, palo, that side-steps these problems by using a set of samples to estimate the unknown distribution, and by using a set of transformations to hill-climb to a local optimum. This process is based on a mathematically rigorous form of utility analysis: in particular, it uses statistical techniques to determine whether the result of a proposed transformation will be better than the original system. We also present an efficient way of implementing this learning system in the context of a general class of performance elements, and include empirical evidence that this approach can work effectively. fl Much of this work was performed at the University of Toronto, where it was supported by the Institute for Robotics and Intelligent Systems and by an operating grant from the National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada. We also gratefully acknowledge receiving many helpful comments from William Cohen, Dave Mitchell, Dale Schuurmans and the anonymous referees. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #217139. 	[Title] Unifying Empirical and Explanation-Based Learning by Modeling the Utility of Learned Knowledge [Abstract] The overfit problem in empirical learning and the utility problem in explanation-based learning describe a similar phenomenon: the degradation of performance due to an increase in the amount of learned knowledge. Plotting the performance of learned knowledge during the course of learning (the performance response) reveals a common trend for several learning methods. Modeling this trend allows a control system to constrain the amount of learned knowledge to achieve peak performance and avoid the general utility problem. Experiments evaluate a particular empirical model of the trend, and analysis of the learners derive several formal models. If, as evidence suggests, the general utility problem can be modeled using the same mechanisms for different learning paradigms, then the model serves to unify the paradigms into one framework capable of comparing and selecting different learning methods based on predicted achievable performance. 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 #84021. 	[Title] Using Genetic Algorithms for Supervised Concept Learning [Abstract] Genetic Algorithms (GAs) have traditionally been used for non-symbolic learning tasks. In this chapter we consider the application of a GA to a symbolic learning task, supervised concept learning from examples. A GA concept learner (GABL) is implemented that learns a concept from a set of positive and negative examples. GABL is run in a batch-incremental mode to facilitate comparison with an incremental concept learner, ID5R. Preliminary results support that, despite minimal system bias, GABL is an effective concept learner and is quite competitive with ID5R as the target concept increases in complexity. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #887. 	[Title] Some studies in machine learning using the game of checkers. IBM Journal, 3(3):211-229, 1959. Some [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #40151. 	[Title] Hoeffding Races: Accelerating Model Selection Search for Classification and Function Approximation [Abstract] Selecting a good model of a set of input points by cross validation is a computationally intensive process, especially if the number of possible models or the number of training points is high. Techniques such as gradient descent are helpful in searching through the space of models, but problems such as local minima, and more importantly, lack of a distance metric between various models reduce the applicability of these search methods. Hoeffding Races is a technique for finding a good model for the data by quickly discarding bad models, and concentrating the computational effort at differentiating between the better ones. This paper focuses on the special case of leave-one-out cross validation applied to memory-based learning algorithms, but we also argue that it is applicable to any class of model selection problems. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #143323. 	[Title] AN EMPIRICAL APPROACH TO SOLVING THE GENERAL UTILITY PROBLEM IN SPEEDUP LEARNING [Abstract] The utility problem in speedup learning describes a common behavior of machine learning methods: the eventual degradation of performance due to increasing amounts of learned knowledge. The shape of the learning curve (cost of using a learning method vs. number of training examples) over several domains suggests a parameterized model relating performance to the amount of learned knowledge and a mechanism to limit the amount of learned knowledge for optimal performance. Many recent approaches to avoiding the utility problem in speedup learning rely on sophisticated utility measures and significant numbers of training data to accurately estimate the utility of control knowledge. Empirical results presented here and elsewhere indicate that a simple selection strategy of retaining all control rules derived from a training problem explanation quickly defines an efficient set of control knowledge from few training problems. This simple selection strategy provides a low-cost alternative to example-intensive approaches for improving the speed of a problem solver. Experimentation illustrates the existence of a minimum (representing least cost) in the learning curve which is reached after a few training examples. Stress is placed on controlling the amount of learned knowledge as opposed to which knowledge. An attempt is also made to relate domain characteristics to the shape of the learning curve. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1113852. 	[Title] Learning an Optimally Accurate Representational System [Abstract] The multiple extension problem arises because a default theory can use different subsets of its defaults to propose different, mutually incompatible, answers to some queries. This paper presents an algorithm that uses a set of observations to learn a credulous version of this default theory that is (essentially) "optimally accurate". In more detail, we can associate a given default theory with a set of related credulous theories R = fR i g, where each R i uses its own total ordering of the defaults to determine which single answer to return for each query. Our goal is to select the credulous theory that has the highest "expected accuracy", where each R i 's expected accuracy is the probability that the answer it produces to a query will correspond correctly to the world. Unfortunately, a theory's expected accuracy depends on the distribution of queries, which is usually not known. Moreover, the task of identifying the optimal R opt 2 R, even given that distribution information, is intractable. This paper presents a method, OptAcc, that sidesteps these problems by using a set of samples to estimate the unknown distribution, and by hill-climbing to a local optimum. In particular, given any parameters *; ffi &gt; 0, OptAcc produces an R oa 2 R whose expected accuracy is, with probability at least 1 ffi, within * of a local optimum. Appeared in ECAI Workshop on Theoretical Foundations of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #74749. 	[Title] Probably Approximately Optimal Derivation Strategies [Abstract] An inference graph can have many "derivation strategies", each a particular ordering of the steps involved in reducing a given query to a sequence of database retrievals. An "optimal strategy" for a given distribution of queries is a complete strategy whose "expected cost" is minimal, where the expected cost depends on the conditional probabilities that each requested retrieval succeeds, given that a member of this class of queries is posed. This paper describes the PAO algorithm that first uses a set of training examples to approximate these probability values, and then uses these estimates to produce a "probably approximately optimal" strategy | i.e., given any *; ffi &gt; 0, PAO produces a strategy whose cost is within * of the cost of the optimal strategy, with probability greater than 1 ffi. This paper also shows how to obtain these strategies in time polynomial in 1=*, 1=ffi and the size of the inference graph, for many important classes of graphs, including all and-or trees. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #137790. 	[Title] ON THE SAMPLE COMPLEXITY OF FINDING GOOD SEARCH STRATEGIES 2n trials of each undetermined experiment [Abstract] A satisficing search problem consists of a set of probabilistic experiments to be performed in some order, without repetitions, until a satisfying configuration of successes and failures has been reached. The cost of performing the experiments depends on the order chosen. Earlier work has concentrated on finding optimal search strategies in special cases of this model, such as search trees and and-or graphs, when the cost function and the success probabilities for the experiments are given. In contrast, we study the complexity of "learning" an approximately optimal search strategy when some of the success probabilities are not known at the outset. Working in the fully general model, we show that if n is the number of unknown probabilities, and C is the maximum cost of performing all the experiments, then Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #154134 has the title `Simple Selection of Utile Control Rules in Speedup Learning  
` and the abstract `Many recent approaches to avoiding the utility problem in speedup learning rely on sophisticated utility measures and significant numbers of training data to accurately estimate the utility of control knowledge. Empirical results presented here and elsewhere indicate that a simple selection strategy of retaining all control rules derived from a training problem explanation quickly defines an efficient set of control knowledge from few training problems. This simple selection strategy provides a low-cost alternative to example-intensive approaches for improving the speed of a problem solver.
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #154134 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #154134 has the title `Simple Selection of Utile Control Rules in Speedup Learning  
` and the abstract `Many recent approaches to avoiding the utility problem in speedup learning rely on sophisticated utility measures and significant numbers of training data to accurately estimate the utility of control knowledge. Empirical results presented here and elsewhere indicate that a simple selection strategy of retaining all control rules derived from a training problem explanation quickly defines an efficient set of control knowledge from few training problems. This simple selection strategy provides a low-cost alternative to example-intensive approaches for improving the speed of a problem solver.
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #154134 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