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: We train a generator by maximum likelihood and we also train the same generator architecture by Wasserstein GAN. We then compare the generated samples, exact log-probability densities and approximate Wasserstein distances. We show that an independent critic trained to approximate Wasserstein distance between the validation set and the generator distribution helps detect overfitting. Finally, we use ideas from the one-shot learning literature to develop a novel fast learning critic.

SOLUTION: Comparison of Maximum Likelihood and GAN-based training of Real NVPs

PROBLEM: Nowadays ontologies present a growing interest in Data Fusion applications. As a matter of fact, the ontologies are seen as a semantic tool for describing and reasoning about sensor data, objects, relations and general domain theories. In addition, uncertainty is perhaps one of the most important characteristics of the data and information handled by Data Fusion. However, the fundamental nature of ontologies implies that ontologies describe only asserted and veracious facts of the world. Different probabilistic, fuzzy and evidential approaches already exist to fill this gap; this paper recaps the most popular tools. However none of the tools meets exactly our purposes. Therefore, we constructed a Dempster-Shafer ontology that can be imported into any specific domain ontology and that enables us to instantiate it in an uncertain manner. We also developed a Java application that enables reasoning about these uncertain ontological instances.

SOLUTION: Uncertainty in Ontologies: Dempster-Shafer Theory for Data Fusion Applications

PROBLEM: We study online boosting, the task of converting any weak online learner into a strong online learner. Based on a novel and natural definition of weak online learnability, we develop two online boosting algorithms. The first algorithm is an online version of boost-by-majority. By proving a matching lower bound, we show that this algorithm is essentially optimal in terms of the number of weak learners and the sample complexity needed to achieve a specified accuracy. This optimal algorithm is not adaptive, however. Using tools from online loss minimization, we derive an adaptive online boosting algorithm that is also parameter-free, but not optimal. Both algorithms work with base learners that can handle example importance weights directly, as well as by rejection sampling examples with probability defined by the booster. Results are complemented with an experimental study.

SOLUTION:
Optimal and Adaptive Algorithms for Online Boosting