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: We seek decision rules for prediction-time cost reduction, where complete data is available for training, but during prediction-time, each feature can only be acquired for an additional cost. We propose a novel random forest algorithm to minimize prediction error for a user-specified average feature acquisition budget. While random forests yield strong generalization performance, they do not explicitly account for feature costs and furthermore require low correlation among trees, which amplifies costs. Our random forest grows trees with low acquisition cost and high strength based on greedy minimax cost-weighted-impurity splits. Theoretically, we establish near-optimal acquisition cost guarantees for our algorithm. Empirically, on a number of benchmark datasets we demonstrate superior accuracy-cost curves against state-of-the-art prediction-time algorithms.

Answer: Feature-Budgeted Random Forest


Question: 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.

Answer: Max-Margin Metric Learning for Speaker Recognition


Question: Given a set of conflicting arguments, there can exist multiple plausible opinions about which arguments should be accepted, rejected, or deemed undecided. We study the problem of how multiple such judgments can be aggregated. We define the problem by adapting various classical social-choice-theoretic properties for the argumentation domain. We show that while argument-wise plurality voting satisfies many properties, it fails to guarantee the collective rationality of the outcome. We then present more general results, proving multiple impossibility results on the existence of any good aggregation operator. After characterising the sufficient and necessary conditions for satisfying collective rationality, we study whether restricting the domain of argument-wise plurality voting to classical semantics allows us to escape the impossibility result. We close by mentioning a couple of graph-theoretical restrictions under which the argument-wise plurality rule does produce collectively rational outcomes. In addition to identifying fundamental barriers to collective argument evaluation, our results contribute to research at the intersection of the argumentation and computational social choice fields. 1 ar X iv :1 40 5. 65 09 v3 [ cs .A I] 1 9 Ju l 2 01 5

Answer:
Judgment Aggregation in Multi-Agent Argumentation