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: © Scott A. Hale 2016. This is the author’s version of the work. It is posted here for your personal use. Not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in CHI EA 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2851581.2892466. Abstract The number of user reviews of tourist attractions, restaurants, mobile apps, etc. is increasing for all languages; yet, research is lacking on how reviews in multiple languages should be aggregated and displayed. Speakers of different languages may have consistently different experiences, e.g., different information available in different languages at tourist attractions or different user experiences with software due to internationalization/localization choices. This paper assesses the similarity in the ratings given by speakers of different languages to London tourist attractions on TripAdvisor. The correlations between different languages are generally high, but some language pairs are more correlated than others. The results question the common practice of computing average ratings from reviews in many languages.

Answer: User Reviews and Language: How Language Influences Ratings


Question: Latent variable models are a fundamental modeling tool in machine learning applications, but they present significant computational and analytical challenges. The popular EM algorithm and its variants, is a much used algorithmic tool; yet our rigorous understanding of its performance is highly incomplete. Recently, work in Balakrishnan et al. (2014) has demonstrated that for an important class of problems, EM exhibits linear local convergence. In the high-dimensional setting, however, the M -step may not be well defined. We address precisely this setting through a unified treatment using regularization. While regularization for high-dimensional problems is by now well understood, the iterative EM algorithm requires a careful balancing of making progress towards the solution while identifying the right structure (e.g., sparsity or low-rank). In particular, regularizing the M -step using the state-of-the-art high-dimensional prescriptions (e.g., à la Wainwright (2014)) is not guaranteed to provide this balance. Our algorithm and analysis are linked in a way that reveals the balance between optimization and statistical errors. We specialize our general framework to sparse gaussian mixture models, high-dimensional mixed regression, and regression with missing variables, obtaining statistical guarantees for each of these examples.

Answer: Regularized EM Algorithms: A Unified Framework and Statistical Guarantees


Question: Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a well-established paradigm of declarative programming that has been developed in the field of logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning. Advances in ASP solving technology are customarily assessed in competition events, as it happens for other closely-related problemsolving technologies like SAT/SMT, QBF, Planning and Scheduling. ASP Competitions are (usually) biennial events; however, the Fifth ASP Competition departs from tradition, in order to join the FLoC Olympic Games at the Vienna Summer of Logic 2014, which is expected to be the largest event in the history of logic. This edition of the ASP Competition series is jointly organized by the University of Calabria (Italy), the Aalto University (Finland), and the University of Genova (Italy), and is affiliated with the 30th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP 2014). It features a completely re-designed setup, with novelties involving the design of tracks, the scoring schema, and the adherence to a fixed modeling language in order to push the adoption of the ASP-Core-2 standard. Benchmark domains are taken from past editions, and best system packages submitted in 2013 are compared with new versions and solvers.

Answer:
The Design of the Fifth Answer Set Programming Competition