TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Latent tree analysis seeks to model the correlations among a set of random variables using a tree of latent variables. It was proposed as an improvement to latent class analysis — a method widely used in social sciences and medicine to identify homogeneous subgroups in a population. It provides new and fruitful perspectives on a number of machine learning areas, including cluster analysis, topic detection, and deep probabilistic modeling. This paper gives an overview of the research on latent tree analysis and various ways it is used in practice. Much of machine learning is about modeling and utilizing correlations among variables. In classification, the task is to establish relationships between attributes and class variables so that unseen data can be classified accurately. In Bayesian networks, dependencies among variables are represented as directed acyclic graphs and the graphs are used to facilitate efficient probabilistic inference. In topic models, word cooccurrences are accounted for by assuming that all words are generated probabilistically from the same set of topics, and the generation process is reverted via statistical inference to determine the topics. In deep belief networks, correlations among observed units are modeled using multiple levels of hidden units, and the top-level hidden units are used as a representation of the data for further analysis. Latent tree analysis (LTA) seeks to model the correlations among a set of observed variables using a tree model, called latent tree model (LTM), where the leaf nodes represent observed variables and the internal nodes represent latent variables.The dependence between two observed variables is explained by the path between them. Despite their simplicity, LTMs subsume two classes of models widely used in academic research. The first one is latent class models (LCMs) (Lazarsfeld and Henry, 1968; Knott and Bartholomew, 1999), which are LTMs with a single latent variable. They are used for categorical data clustering in social sciences and medicine. The second class is probabilistic phylogenetic trees (Durbin et al., 1998), which are a tool for determining the evolution history of a set of species. Phylogenetic trees are special LTMs where the model structures are binary (bifurcating) trees and all the Copyright c © 2017, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved. variables have the same number of possible states. LTA also provides new and fruitful perspectives on a number of machine learning areas. One area is cluster analysis. Here finite mixture models such as LCMs are commonly used. A finite mixture model has one latent variable and consequently it gives one soft partition of data. An LTM typically has multiple latent variables and hence LTA yields multiple soft partitions of data simultaneously. In other words, LTA performs multidimensional clustering (Chen et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2013). It is interesting because complex data usually have multiple facets and can be meaningfully clustered in multiple ways. Another area is topic detection. Applying LTA to text data, we can partition a collection of documents in multiple ways. The document clusters in the partitions can be interpreted as topics. Furthermore, it is possible to learn hierarchical LTMs where the latent variables are organized into multiple layers. This leads to an alternative method for hierarchical topic detection (Liu, Zhang, and Chen, 2014; Chen et al., 2016a), which has been shown to find more meaningful topics and topic hierarchies than the state-of-the-art method based on latent Dirichlet allocation (Paisley et al., 2015). The third area is deep probabilistic modeling. Hierarchical LTM and deep belief network (DBN) (Hinton, Osindero, and Teh, 2006) are similar in that they both consist of multiple layers of variables, with an observed layer at the bottom and multiple layers of hidden units on top of it. One difference is that, in DBN, units from adjacent layers are fully connected, while HLTM is tree-structured. It would be interesting to explore the middle ground between the two extreme and develop algorithms for learning what might be called sparse DBNs. Learning structures for deep models is an interesting open problem. Extension of LTA might offer one solution (Chen et al., 2016b). The concept of latent tree models was introduced in (Zhang, 2002, 2004), where they were referred to as hierarchical latent class models. The term “latent tree models” first appeared in (Zhang et al., 2008; Wang, Zhang, and Chen, 2008). Mourad et al. (2013) surveyed the research on latent tree models as of 2012 in details. This paper provides a concise overview of the methodology. The exposition are more conceptual and less technical than (Mourad et al., 2013). Developments after 2012 are also included. ar X iv :1 61 0. 00 08 5v 1 [ cs .L G ] 1 O ct 2 01 6

SOLUTION: Latent Tree Analysis

PROBLEM: 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.

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

PROBLEM: Number of web services available on Internet and its usage are increasing very fast. In many cases, one service is not enough to complete the business requirement; composition of web services is carried out. Autonomous composition of web services to achieve new functionality is generating considerable attention in semantic web domain. Development time and effort for new applications can be reduced with service composition. Various approaches to carry out automated composition of web services are discussed in literature. Web service composition using ontologies is one of the effective approaches. In this paper we demonstrate how the ontology based composition can be made faster for each customer. We propose a framework to provide precomposed web services to fulfil user requirements. We detail how ontology merging can be used for composition which expedites the whole process. We discuss how framework provides customer specific ontology merging and repository. We also elaborate on how merging of ontologies is carried out. Keywords— Semantic Web, Web service composition, domain ontology, OWL-S, ontology merging

SOLUTION:
A Framework for Semi-automated Web Service Composition in Semantic Web