In this task, you are given a part of an article. Your task is to generate headline (title) for this text. Preferred headlines are under fifteen words.
--------
Question: In recent years, Deep Learning has become the go-to solution for a broad range of applications, often outperforming state-of-the-art. However, it is important, for both theoreticians and practitioners, to gain a deeper understanding of the difficulties and limitations associated with common approaches and algorithms. We describe four families of problems for which some of the commonly used existing algorithms fail or suffer significant difficulty. We illustrate the failures through practical experiments, and provide theoretical insights explaining their source, and how they might be remedied.

Answer: Failures of Deep Learning


Question: We present a new system S for handling uncertainty in a quantified modal logic (first-order modal logic). The system is based on both probability theory and proof theory. The system is derived from Chisholm’s epistemology. We concretize Chisholm’s system by grounding his undefined and primitive (i.e. foundational) concept of reasonableness in probability and proof theory. S can be useful in systems that have to interact with humans and provide justifications for their uncertainty. As a demonstration of the system, we apply the system to provide a solution to the lottery paradox. Another advantage of the system is that it can be used to provide uncertainty values for counterfactual statements. Counterfactuals are statements that an agent knows for sure are false. Among other cases, counterfactuals are useful when systems have to explain their actions to users (If I had not done α, then φ would have happened). Uncertainties for counterfactuals fall out naturally from our system. Efficient reasoning in just simple first-order logic is a hard problem. Resolution-based first-order reasoning systems have made significant progress over the last several decades in building systems that have solved non-trivial tasks (even unsolved conjectures in mathematics). We present a sketch of a novel algorithm for reasoning that extends firstorder resolution. Finally, while there have been many systems of uncertainty for propositional logics, first-order logics and propositional modal logics, there has been very little work in building systems of uncertainty for first-order modal logics. The work described below is in progress; and once finished will address this lack.

Answer: Strength Factors: An Uncertainty System for a Quantified Modal Logic


Question: Online learning algorithms are designed to learn even when their input is generated by an adversary. The widely-accepted formal definition of an online algorithm’s ability to learn is the game-theoretic notion of regret. We argue that the standard definition of regret becomes inadequate if the adversary is allowed to adapt to the online algorithm’s actions. We define the alternative notion of policy regret, which attempts to provide a more meaningful way to measure an online algorithm’s performance against adaptive adversaries. Focusing on the online bandit setting, we show that no bandit algorithm can guarantee a sublinear policy regret against an adaptive adversary with unbounded memory. On the other hand, if the adversary’s memory is bounded, we present a general technique that converts any bandit algorithm with a sublinear regret bound into an algorithm with a sublinear policy regret bound. We extend this result to other variants of regret, such as switching regret, internal regret, and swap regret.

Answer:
Online Bandit Learning against an Adaptive Adversary: from Regret to Policy Regret