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.

The deep Boltzmann machine (DBM) has been an important development in the quest for powerful “deep” probabilistic models. To date, simultaneous or joint training of all layers of the DBM has been largely unsuccessful with existing training methods. We introduce a simple regularization scheme that encourages the weight vectors associated with each hidden unit to have similar norms. We demonstrate that this regularization can be easily combined with standard stochastic maximum likelihood to yield an effective training strategy for the simultaneous training of all layers of the deep Boltzmann machine.
On Training Deep Boltzmann Machines

Indefinite similarity measures can be frequently found in bio-informatics by means of alignment scores, but are also common in other fields like shape measures in image retrieval. Lacking an underlying vector space, the data are given as pairwise similarities only. The few algorithms available for such data do not scale to larger datasets. Focusing on probabilistic batch classifiers, the Indefinite Kernel Fisher Discriminant (iKFD) and the Probabilistic Classification Vector Machine (PCVM) are both effective algorithms for this type of data but, with cubic complexity. Here we propose an extension of iKFD and PCVM such that linear runtime and memory complexity is achieved for low rank indefinite kernels. Employing the Nyström approximation for indefinite kernels, we also propose a new almost parameter free approach to identify the landmarks, restricted to a supervised learning problem. Evaluations at several larger similarity data from various domains show that the proposed methods provides similar generalization capabilities while being easier to parametrize and substantially faster for large scale data.
Probabilistic classifiers with low rank indefinite kernels

A dictionary defines words in terms of other words. Definitions can tell you the meanings of words you don’t know, but only if you know the meanings of the defining words. How many words do you need to know (and which ones) in order to be able to learn all the rest from definitions? We reduced dictionaries to their “grounding kernels” (GKs), about 10% of the dictionary, from which all the other words could be defined. The GK words turned out to have psycholinguistic correlates: they were learned at an earlier age and more concrete than the rest of the dictionary. But one can compress still more: the GK turns out to have internal structure, with a strongly connected “kernel core” (KC) and a surrounding layer, from which a hierarchy of definitional distances can be derived, all the way out to the periphery of the full dictionary. These definitional distances, too, are correlated with psycholinguistic variables (age of acquisition, concreteness, imageability, oral and written frequency) and hence perhaps with the “mental lexicon” in each of our heads.

Hierarchies in Dictionary Definition Space