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.

Ex Input:
Probabilistic linear discriminant analysis (PLDA) is a popular normalization approach for the i-vector model, and has delivered state-of-the-art performance in speaker recognition. A potential problem of the PLDA model, however, is that it essentially assumes Gaussian distributions over speaker vectors, which is not always true in practice. Additionally, the objective function is not directly related to the goal of the task, e.g., discriminating true speakers and imposters. In this paper, we propose a max-margin metric learning approach to solve the problems. It learns a linear transform with a criterion that the margin between target and imposter trials are maximized. Experiments conducted on the SRE08 core test show that compared to PLDA, the new approach can obtain comparable or even better performance, though the scoring is simply a cosine computation.

Ex Output:
Max-Margin Metric Learning for Speaker Recognition


Ex Input:
Metric learning seeks a transformation of the feature space that enhances prediction quality for the given task at hand. In this work we provide PAC-style sample complexity rates for supervised metric learning. We give matching lowerand upper-bounds showing that the sample complexity scales with the representation dimension when no assumptions are made about the underlying data distribution. However, by leveraging the structure of the data distribution, we show that one can achieve rates that are fine-tuned to a specific notion of intrinsic complexity for a given dataset. Our analysis reveals that augmenting the metric learning optimization criterion with a simple norm-based regularization can help adapt to a dataset’s intrinsic complexity, yielding better generalization. Experiments on benchmark datasets validate our analysis and show that regularizing the metric can help discern the signal even when the data contains high amounts of noise.

Ex Output:
Sample Complexity of Learning Mahalanobis Distance Metrics


Ex Input:
There is overwhelming evidence that human intelligence is a product of Darwinian evolution. Investigating the consequences of self-modification, and more precisely, the consequences of utility function self-modification, leads to the stronger claim that not only human, but any form of intelligence is ultimately only possible within evolutionary processes. Humandesigned artificial intelligences can only remain stable until they discover how to manipulate their own utility function. By definition, a human designer cannot prevent a superhuman intelligence from modifying itself, even if protection mechanisms against this action are put in place. Without evolutionary pressure, sufficiently advanced artificial intelligences become inert by simplifying their own utility function. Within evolutionary processes, the implicit utility function is always reducible to persistence, and the control of superhuman intelligences embedded in evolutionary processes is not possible. Mechanisms against utility function self-modification are ultimately futile. Instead, scientific effort toward the mitigation of existential risks from the development of superintelligences should be in two directions: understanding consciousness, and the complex dynamics of evolutionary systems.

Ex Output:

Non-Evolutionary Superintelligences Do Nothing, Eventually