Semiautomaton

In mathematics and theoretical computer science, a semiautomaton is a deterministic finite automaton having inputs but no output. It consists of a set Q of states, a set Σ called the input alphabet, and a function T: Q × Σ → Q called the transition function. Associated with any semiautomaton is a monoid called the characteristic monoid, input monoid, transition monoid or transition system of the semiautomaton, which acts on the set of states Q. This may be viewed either as an action of the free monoid of strings in the input alphabet Σ, or as the induced transformation semigroup of Q. In older books like Clifford and Preston (1967) semigroup actions are called "operands". In category theory, semiautomata essentially are functors. == Transformation semigroups and monoid acts == A transformation semigroup or transformation monoid is a pair ( M , Q ) {\displaystyle (M,Q)} consisting of a set Q (often called the "set of states") and a semigroup or monoid M of functions, or "transformations", mapping Q to itself. They are functions in the sense that every element m of M is a map m : Q → Q {\displaystyle m\colon Q\to Q} . If s and t are two functions of the transformation semigroup, their semigroup product is defined as their function composition ( s t ) ( q ) = ( s ∘ t ) ( q ) = s ( t ( q ) ) {\displaystyle (st)(q)=(s\circ t)(q)=s(t(q))} . Some authors regard "semigroup" and "monoid" as synonyms. Here a semigroup need not have an identity element; a monoid is a semigroup with an identity element (also called "unit"). Since the notion of functions acting on a set always includes the notion of an identity function, which when applied to the set does nothing, a transformation semigroup can be made into a monoid by adding the identity function. === M-acts === Let M be a monoid and Q be a non-empty set. If there exists a multiplicative operation μ : Q × M → Q {\displaystyle \mu \colon Q\times M\to Q} ( q , m ) ↦ q m = μ ( q , m ) {\displaystyle (q,m)\mapsto qm=\mu (q,m)} which satisfies the properties q 1 = q {\displaystyle q1=q} for 1 the unit of the monoid, and q ( s t ) = ( q s ) t {\displaystyle q(st)=(qs)t} for all q ∈ Q {\displaystyle q\in Q} and s , t ∈ M {\displaystyle s,t\in M} , then the triple ( Q , M , μ ) {\displaystyle (Q,M,\mu )} is called a right M-act or simply a right act. In long-hand, μ {\displaystyle \mu } is the right multiplication of elements of Q by elements of M. The right act is often written as Q M {\displaystyle Q_{M}} . A left act is defined similarly, with μ : M × Q → Q {\displaystyle \mu \colon M\times Q\to Q} ( m , q ) ↦ m q = μ ( m , q ) {\displaystyle (m,q)\mapsto mq=\mu (m,q)} and is often denoted as M Q {\displaystyle \,_{M}Q} . An M-act is closely related to a transformation monoid. However the elements of M need not be functions per se, they are just elements of some monoid. Therefore, one must demand that the action of μ {\displaystyle \mu } be consistent with multiplication in the monoid (i.e. μ ( q , s t ) = μ ( μ ( q , s ) , t ) {\displaystyle \mu (q,st)=\mu (\mu (q,s),t)} ), as, in general, this might not hold for some arbitrary μ {\displaystyle \mu } , in the way that it does for function composition. Once one makes this demand, it is completely safe to drop all parenthesis, as the monoid product and the action of the monoid on the set are completely associative. In particular, this allows elements of the monoid to be represented as strings of letters, in the computer-science sense of the word "string". This abstraction then allows one to talk about string operations in general, and eventually leads to the concept of formal languages as being composed of strings of letters. Another difference between an M-act and a transformation monoid is that for an M-act Q, two distinct elements of the monoid may determine the same transformation of Q. If we demand that this does not happen, then an M-act is essentially the same as a transformation monoid. === M-homomorphism === For two M-acts Q M {\displaystyle Q_{M}} and B M {\displaystyle B_{M}} sharing the same monoid M {\displaystyle M} , an M-homomorphism f : Q M → B M {\displaystyle f\colon Q_{M}\to B_{M}} is a map f : Q → B {\displaystyle f\colon Q\to B} such that f ( q m ) = f ( q ) m {\displaystyle f(qm)=f(q)m} for all q ∈ Q M {\displaystyle q\in Q_{M}} and m ∈ M {\displaystyle m\in M} . The set of all M-homomorphisms is commonly written as H o m ( Q M , B M ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {Hom} (Q_{M},B_{M})} or H o m M ( Q , B ) {\displaystyle \mathrm {Hom} _{M}(Q,B)} . The M-acts and M-homomorphisms together form a category called M-Act. == Semiautomata == A semiautomaton is a triple ( Q , Σ , T ) {\displaystyle (Q,\Sigma ,T)} where Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is a non-empty set, called the input alphabet, Q is a non-empty set, called the set of states, and T is the transition function T : Q × Σ → Q . {\displaystyle T\colon Q\times \Sigma \to Q.} When the set of states Q is a finite set—it need not be—, a semiautomaton may be thought of as a deterministic finite automaton ( Q , Σ , T , q 0 , A ) {\displaystyle (Q,\Sigma ,T,q_{0},A)} , but without the initial state q 0 {\displaystyle q_{0}} or set of accept states A. Alternately, it is a finite-state machine that has no output, and only an input. Any semiautomaton induces an act of a monoid in the following way. Let Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} be the free monoid generated by the alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } (so that the superscript is understood to be the Kleene star); it is the set of all finite-length strings composed of the letters in Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } . For every word w in Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} , let T w : Q → Q {\displaystyle T_{w}\colon Q\to Q} be the function, defined recursively, as follows, for all q in Q: If w = ε {\displaystyle w=\varepsilon } , then T ε ( q ) = q {\displaystyle T_{\varepsilon }(q)=q} , so that the empty word ε {\displaystyle \varepsilon } does not change the state. If w = σ {\displaystyle w=\sigma } is a letter in Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } , then T σ ( q ) = T ( q , σ ) {\displaystyle T_{\sigma }(q)=T(q,\sigma )} . If w = σ v {\displaystyle w=\sigma v} for σ ∈ Σ {\displaystyle \sigma \in \Sigma } and v ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle v\in \Sigma ^{}} , then T w ( q ) = T v ( T σ ( q ) ) {\displaystyle T_{w}(q)=T_{v}(T_{\sigma }(q))} . Let M ( Q , Σ , T ) {\displaystyle M(Q,\Sigma ,T)} be the set M ( Q , Σ , T ) = { T w | w ∈ Σ ∗ } . {\displaystyle M(Q,\Sigma ,T)=\{T_{w}\vert w\in \Sigma ^{}\}.} The set M ( Q , Σ , T ) {\displaystyle M(Q,\Sigma ,T)} is closed under function composition; that is, for all v , w ∈ Σ ∗ {\displaystyle v,w\in \Sigma ^{}} , one has T w ∘ T v = T v w {\displaystyle T_{w}\circ T_{v}=T_{vw}} . It also contains T ε {\displaystyle T_{\varepsilon }} , which is the identity function on Q. Since function composition is associative, the set M ( Q , Σ , T ) {\displaystyle M(Q,\Sigma ,T)} is a monoid: it is called the input monoid, characteristic monoid, characteristic semigroup or transition monoid of the semiautomaton ( Q , Σ , T ) {\displaystyle (Q,\Sigma ,T)} . == Properties == If the set of states Q is finite, then the transition functions are commonly represented as state transition tables. The structure of all possible transitions driven by strings in the free monoid has a graphical depiction as a de Bruijn graph. The set of states Q need not be finite, or even countable. As an example, semiautomata underpin the concept of quantum finite automata. There, the set of states Q are given by the complex projective space C P n {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} P^{n}} , and individual states are referred to as n-state qubits. State transitions are given by unitary n×n matrices. The input alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } remains finite, and other typical concerns of automata theory remain in play. Thus, the quantum semiautomaton may be simply defined as the triple ( C P n , Σ , { U σ 1 , U σ 2 , … , U σ p } ) {\displaystyle (\mathbb {C} P^{n},\Sigma ,\{U_{\sigma _{1}},U_{\sigma _{2}},\dotsc ,U_{\sigma _{p}}\})} when the alphabet Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } has p letters, so that there is one unitary matrix U σ {\displaystyle U_{\sigma }} for each letter σ ∈ Σ {\displaystyle \sigma \in \Sigma } . Stated in this way, the quantum semiautomaton has many geometrical generalizations. Thus, for example, one may take a Riemannian symmetric space in place of C P n {\displaystyle \mathbb {C} P^{n}} , and selections from its group of isometries as transition functions. The syntactic monoid of a regular language is isomorphic to the transition monoid of the minimal automaton accepting the language. == Literature == A. H. Clifford and G. B. Preston, The Algebraic Theory of Semigroups. American Mathematical Society, volume 2 (1967), ISBN 978-0-8218-0272-4. F. Gecseg and I. Peak, Algebraic Theory of Automata (1972), Akademiai Kiado, Budapest. W. M. L. Holcombe, Algebraic Automata Theory (1982), Cambridge University Press J. M. Howie, Automata and Languages, (1991), Cla

Braina

Braina is a virtual assistant and speech-to-text dictation application for Microsoft Windows developed by Brainasoft. Braina uses natural language interface, speech synthesis, and speech recognition technology to interact with its users and allows them to use natural language sentences to perform various tasks on a computer. The name Braina is a short form of "Brain Artificial". Braina is marketed as a Microsoft Copilot alternative. It provides a voice interface for several locally run and cloud large language models, including the latest LLMs from providers such as OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, xAI, Meta, Mistral, etc; while improving data privacy. Braina also allows responses from its in-house large language models like Braina Swift and Braina Pinnacle. It has an "Artificial Brain" feature that provides persistent memory support for supported LLMs. == Features == Braina provides is able to carry out various tasks on a computer, including automation. Braina can take commands inputted through typing or through dictation to store reminders, find information online, perform mathematical operations, open files, generate images from text, transcribe speech, and control open windows or programs. Braina adapts to user behavior over time with a goal of better anticipating needs. === Speech-to-text dictation === Braina Pro can type spoken words into an active window at the location of a user's cursor. Its speech recognition technology supports more than 100 languages and dialects and is able to isolate the recognition of a user's voice from disturbing environmental factors such as background noise, other human voices, or external devices. Braina can also be taught to dictate uncommon legal, medical, and scientific terms. Users can also teach Braina uncommon names and vocabulary. Users can edit or correct dictated text without using a keyboard or mouse by giving built-in voice commands. === Text-to-speech === Braina can read aloud selected texts, such as e-books. === Custom commands and automation === Braina can automate computer tasks. It lets users create custom voice commands to perform tasks such as opening files, programs, websites, or emails, as well as executing keyboard or mouse macros. === Transcription === Braina can transcribe media file formats such as WAV, MP3, and MP4 into text. === Notes and reminders === Braina can store and recall notes and reminders. These can include scheduled or unscheduled commands, checklist items, alarms, chat conversations, memos, website snippets, bookmarks, contacts. === Image and Video generation === Braina can generate AI images and videos from text and image inputs using generative cloud AI models. These include Black Forest Labs' FLUX.2, Google's Veo, Imagen, and Nano Banana Pro, Kuaishou's Kling, Alibaba's Wan, ByteDance's Seedance and Seedream, MiniMax's Hailuo, OpenAI's GPT Image, and Tongyi Lab's Z Image Turbo. == Platforms == In addition to the desktop version for Windows operating systems, Braina is also available for the iOS and Android operating systems. The mobile version of Braina has a feature allowing remote management of a Windows PC connected via Wi-Fi. == Distributions == Braina is distributed in multiple modes. These include Braina Lite, a freeware version with limitations, and premium versions Braina Pro, Pro Plus, and Pro Ultra. Some additional features in the Pro version include dictation, custom vocabulary, video transcription, automation, custom voice commands, and persistent LLM memory. == Reception == TechRadar has consistently listed Braina as one of the best dictation and virtual assistant apps between 2015 and 2024.

Implicit blockmodeling

Implicit blockmodeling is an approach in blockmodeling, similar to a valued and homogeneity blockmodeling, where initially an additional normalization is used and then while specifying the parameter of the relevant link is replaced by the block maximum. This approach was first proposed by Batagelj and Ferligoj in 2000, and developed by Aleš Žiberna in 2007/08. Comparing with homogeneity, the implicit blockmodeling will perform similarly with max-regular equivalence, but slightly worse in other settings. It will perform worse than valued and homogeneity blockmodeling with a pre-specified blockmodel.

Automated Pain Recognition

Automated Pain Recognition (APR) is a method for objectively measuring pain and at the same time represents an interdisciplinary research area that comprises elements of medicine, psychology, psychobiology, and computer science. The focus is on computer-aided objective recognition of pain, implemented on the basis of machine learning. Automated pain recognition allows for the valid, reliable detection and monitoring of pain in people who are unable to communicate verbally. The underlying machine learning processes are trained and validated in advance by means of unimodal or multimodal body signals. Signals used to detect pain may include facial expressions or gestures and may also be of a (psycho-)physiological or paralinguistic nature. To date, the focus has been on identifying pain intensity, but visionary efforts are also being made to recognize the quality, site, and temporal course of pain. However, the clinical implementation of this approach is a controversial topic in the field of pain research. Critics of automated pain recognition argue that pain diagnosis can only be performed subjectively by humans. == Background == Pain diagnosis under conditions where verbal reporting is restricted - such as in verbally and/or cognitively impaired people or in patients who are sedated or mechanically ventilated - is based on behavioral observations by trained professionals. However, all known observation procedures (e.g., Zurich Observation Pain Assessment (ZOPA)); Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia Scale (PAINAD) require a great deal of specialist expertise. These procedures can be made more difficult by perception- and interpretation-related misjudgments on the part of the observer. With regard to the differences in design, methodology, evaluation sample, and conceptualization of the phenomenon of pain, it is difficult to compare the quality criteria of the various tools. Even if trained personnel could theoretically record pain intensity several times a day using observation instruments, it would not be possible to measure it every minute or second. In this respect, the goal of automated pain recognition is to use valid, robust pain response patterns that can be recorded multimodally for a temporally dynamic, high-resolution, automated pain intensity recognition system. == Procedure == For automated pain recognition, pain-relevant parameters are usually recorded using non-invasive sensor technology, which captures data on the (physical) responses of the person in pain. This can be achieved with camera technology that captures facial expressions, gestures, or posture, while audio sensors record paralinguistic features. (Psycho-)physiological information such as muscle tone and heart rate can be collected via biopotential sensors (electrodes). Pain recognition requires the extraction of meaningful characteristics or patterns from the data collected. This is achieved using machine learning techniques that are able to provide an assessment of the pain after training (learning), e.g., "no pain," "mild pain," or "severe pain." == Parameters == Although the phenomenon of pain comprises different components (sensory discriminative, affective (emotional), cognitive, vegetative, and (psycho-)motor), automated pain recognition currently relies on the measurable parameters of pain responses. These can be divided roughly into the two main categories of "physiological responses" and "behavioral responses". === Physiological responses === In humans, pain almost always initiates autonomic nervous processes that are reflected measurably in various physiological signals. ==== Physiological signals ==== Measurements can include electrodermal activity (EDA, also skin conductance), electromyography (EMG), electrocardiogram (ECG), blood volume pulse (BVP), electroencephalogram (EEG), respiration, and body temperature, which are regulatory mechanisms of the sympathetic and parasympathetic systems. Physiological signals are mainly recorded using special non-invasive surface electrodes (for EDA, EMG, ECG, and EEG), a blood volume pulse sensor (BVP), a respiratory belt (respiration), and a thermal sensor (body temperature). Endocrinological and immunological parameters can also be recorded, but this requires measures that are somewhat invasive (e.g., blood sampling). === Behavioral responses === Behavioral responses to pain fulfil two functions: protection of the body (e.g., through protective reflexes) and external communication of the pain (e.g., as a cry for help). The responses are particularly evident in facial expressions, gestures, and paralinguistic features. ==== Facial expressions ==== Behavioral signals captured comprise facial expression patterns (expressive behavior), which are measured with the aid of video signals. Facial expression recognition is based on the everyday clinical observation that pain often manifests itself in the patient's facial expressions but that this is not necessarily always the case, since facial expressions can be inhibited through self-control. Despite the possibility that facial expressions may be influenced consciously, facial expression behavior represents an essential source of information for pain diagnosis and is thus also a source of information for automatic pain recognition. One advantage of video-based facial expression recognition is the contact-free measurement of the face, provided that it can be captured on video, which is not possible in every position (e.g., lying face down) or may be limited by bandages covering the face. Facial expression analysis relies on rapid, spontaneous, and temporary changes in neuromuscular activity that lead to visually detectable changes in the face. ==== Gestures ==== Gestures are also captured predominantly using non-contact camera technology. Motor pain responses vary and are strongly dependent on the type and cause of the pain. They range from abrupt protective reflexes (e.g., spontaneous retraction of extremities or doubling up) to agitation (pathological restlessness) and avoidance behavior (hesitant, cautious movements). ==== Paralinguistic features of language ==== Among other things, pain leads to nonverbal linguistic behavior that manifests itself in sounds such as sighing, gasping, moaning, whining, etc. Paralinguistic features are usually recorded using highly sensitive microphones. == Algorithms == After the recording, pre-processing (e.g., filtering), and extraction of relevant features, an optional information fusion can be performed. During this process, modalities from different signal sources are merged to generate new or more precise knowledge. The pain is classified using machine learning processes. The method chosen has a significant influence on the recognition rate and depends greatly on the quality and granularity of the underlying data. Similar to the field of affective computing, the following classifiers are currently being used: Support Vector Machine (SVM): The goal of an SVM is to find a clearly defined optimal hyperplane with the greatest minimal distance to two (or more) classes to be separated. The hyperplane acts as a decision function for classifying an unknown pattern. Random Forest (RF): RF is based on the composition of random, uncorrelated decision trees. An unknown pattern is judged individually by each tree and assigned to a class. The final classification of the patterns by the RF is then based on a majority decision. k-Nearest Neighbors (k-NN): The k-NN algorithm classifies an unknown object using the class label that most commonly classifies the k neighbors closest to it. Its neighbors are determined using a selected similarity measure (e.g., Euclidean distance, Jaccard coefficient, etc.). Artificial neural networks (ANNs): ANNs are inspired by biological neural networks and model their organizational principles and processes in a very simplified manner. Class patterns are learned by adjusting the weights of the individual neuronal connections. == Databases == In order to classify pain in a valid manner, it is necessary to create representative, reliable, and valid pain databases that are available to the machine learner for training. An ideal database would be sufficiently large and would consist of natural (not experimental), high-quality pain responses. However, natural responses are difficult to record and can only be obtained to a limited extent; in most cases they are characterized by suboptimal quality. The databases currently available therefore contain experimental or quasi-experimental pain responses, and each database is based on a different pain model. The following list shows a selection of the most relevant pain databases (last updated: April 2020): UNBC-McMaster Shoulder Pain BioVid Heat Pain EmoPain SenseEmotion X-ITE Pain

Analogical modeling

Analogical modeling (AM) is a formal theory of exemplar based analogical reasoning, proposed by Royal Skousen, professor of Linguistics and English language at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah. It is applicable to language modeling and other categorization tasks. Analogical modeling is related to connectionism and nearest neighbor approaches, in that it is data-based rather than abstraction-based; but it is distinguished by its ability to cope with imperfect datasets (such as caused by simulated short term memory limits) and to base predictions on all relevant segments of the dataset, whether near or far. In language modeling, AM has successfully predicted empirically valid forms for which no theoretical explanation was known (see the discussion of Finnish morphology in Skousen et al. 2002). == Implementation == === Overview === An exemplar-based model consists of a general-purpose modeling engine and a problem-specific dataset. Within the dataset, each exemplar (a case to be reasoned from, or an informative past experience) appears as a feature vector: a row of values for the set of parameters that define the problem. For example, in a spelling-to-sound task, the feature vector might consist of the letters of a word. Each exemplar in the dataset is stored with an outcome, such as a phoneme or phone to be generated. When the model is presented with a novel situation (in the form of an outcome-less feature vector), the engine algorithmically sorts the dataset to find exemplars that helpfully resemble it, and selects one, whose outcome is the model's prediction. The particulars of the algorithm distinguish one exemplar-based modeling system from another. In AM, we think of the feature values as characterizing a context, and the outcome as a behavior that occurs within that context. Accordingly, the novel situation is known as the given context. Given the known features of the context, the AM engine systematically generates all contexts that include it (all of its supracontexts), and extracts from the dataset the exemplars that belong to each. The engine then discards those supracontexts whose outcomes are inconsistent (this measure of consistency will be discussed further below), leaving an analogical set of supracontexts, and probabilistically selects an exemplar from the analogical set with a bias toward those in large supracontexts. This multilevel search exponentially magnifies the likelihood of a behavior's being predicted as it occurs reliably in settings that specifically resemble the given context. === Analogical modeling in detail === AM performs the same process for each case it is asked to evaluate. The given context, consisting of n variables, is used as a template to generate 2 n {\displaystyle 2^{n}} supracontexts. Each supracontext is a set of exemplars in which one or more variables have the same values that they do in the given context, and the other variables are ignored. In effect, each is a view of the data, created by filtering for some criteria of similarity to the given context, and the total set of supracontexts exhausts all such views. Alternatively, each supracontext is a theory of the task or a proposed rule whose predictive power needs to be evaluated. It is important to note that the supracontexts are not equal peers one with another; they are arranged by their distance from the given context, forming a hierarchy. If a supracontext specifies all of the variables that another one does and more, it is a subcontext of that other one, and it lies closer to the given context. (The hierarchy is not strictly branching; each supracontext can itself be a subcontext of several others, and can have several subcontexts.) This hierarchy becomes significant in the next step of the algorithm. The engine now chooses the analogical set from among the supracontexts. A supracontext may contain exemplars that only exhibit one behavior; it is deterministically homogeneous and is included. It is a view of the data that displays regularity, or a relevant theory that has never yet been disproven. A supracontext may exhibit several behaviors, but contain no exemplars that occur in any more specific supracontext (that is, in any of its subcontexts); in this case it is non-deterministically homogeneous and is included. Here there is no great evidence that a systematic behavior occurs, but also no counterargument. Finally, a supracontext may be heterogeneous, meaning that it exhibits behaviors that are found in a subcontext (closer to the given context), and also behaviors that are not. Where the ambiguous behavior of the nondeterministically homogeneous supracontext was accepted, this is rejected because the intervening subcontext demonstrates that there is a better theory to be found. The heterogeneous supracontext is therefore excluded. This guarantees that we see an increase in meaningfully consistent behavior in the analogical set as we approach the given context. With the analogical set chosen, each appearance of an exemplar (for a given exemplar may appear in several of the analogical supracontexts) is given a pointer to every other appearance of an exemplar within its supracontexts. One of these pointers is then selected at random and followed, and the exemplar to which it points provides the outcome. This gives each supracontext an importance proportional to the square of its size, and makes each exemplar likely to be selected in direct proportion to the sum of the sizes of all analogically consistent supracontexts in which it appears. Then, of course, the probability of predicting a particular outcome is proportional to the summed probabilities of all the exemplars that support it. (Skousen 2002, in Skousen et al. 2002, pp. 11–25, and Skousen 2003, both passim) === Formulas === Given a context with n {\displaystyle n} elements: total number of pairings: n 2 {\displaystyle n^{2}} number of agreements for outcome i: n i 2 {\displaystyle n_{i}^{2}} number of disagreements for outcome i: n i ( n − n i ) {\displaystyle n_{i}(n-n_{i})} total number of agreements: ∑ n i 2 {\displaystyle \sum {n_{i}^{2}}} total number of disagreements: ∑ n i ( n − n i ) = n 2 − ∑ n i 2 {\displaystyle \sum {n_{i}(n-n_{i})}=n^{2}-\sum {n_{i}^{2}}} === Example === This terminology is best understood through an example. In the example used in the second chapter of Skousen (1989), each context consists of three variables with potential values 0-3 Variable 1: 0,1,2,3 Variable 2: 0,1,2,3 Variable 3: 0,1,2,3 The two outcomes for the dataset are e and r, and the exemplars are: 3 1 0 e 0 3 2 r 2 1 0 r 2 1 2 r 3 1 1 r We define a network of pointers like so: The solid lines represent pointers between exemplars with matching outcomes; the dotted lines represent pointers between exemplars with non-matching outcomes. The statistics for this example are as follows: n = 5 {\displaystyle n=5} n r = 4 {\displaystyle n_{r}=4} n e = 1 {\displaystyle n_{e}=1} total number of pairings: n 2 = 25 {\displaystyle n^{2}=25} number of agreements for outcome r: n r 2 = 16 {\displaystyle n_{r}^{2}=16} number of agreements for outcome e: n e 2 = 1 {\displaystyle n_{e}^{2}=1} number of disagreements for outcome r: n r ( n − n r ) = 4 {\displaystyle n_{r}(n-n_{r})=4} number of disagreements for outcome e: n e ( n − n e ) = 4 {\displaystyle n_{e}(n-n_{e})=4} total number of agreements: n r 2 + n e 2 = 17 {\displaystyle n_{r}^{2}+n_{e}^{2}=17} total number of disagreements: n r ( n − n r ) + n e ( n − n e ) = n 2 − ( n r 2 + n e 2 ) = 8 {\displaystyle n_{r}(n-n_{r})+n_{e}(n-n_{e})=n^{2}-(n_{r}^{2}+n_{e}^{2})=8} uncertainty or fraction of disagreement: 8 / 25 = .32 {\displaystyle 8/25=.32} Behavior can only be predicted for a given context; in this example, let us predict the outcome for the context "3 1 2". To do this, we first find all of the contexts containing the given context; these contexts are called supracontexts. We find the supracontexts by systematically eliminating the variables in the given context; with m variables, there will generally be 2 m {\displaystyle 2^{m}} supracontexts. The following table lists each of the sub- and supracontexts; x means "not x", and - means "anything". These contexts are shown in the venn diagram below: The next step is to determine which exemplars belong to which contexts in order to determine which of the contexts are homogeneous. The table below shows each of the subcontexts, their behavior in terms of the given exemplars, and the number of disagreements within the behavior: Analyzing the subcontexts in the table above, we see that there is only 1 subcontext with any disagreements: "3 1 2", which in the dataset consists of "3 1 0 e" and "3 1 1 r". There are 2 disagreements in this subcontext; 1 pointing from each of the exemplars to the other (see the pointer network pictured above). Therefore, only supracontexts containing this subcontext will contain any disagreements. We use a simple rule to identify the homogeneous supraco

CLEVER score

The CLEVER (Cross Lipschitz Extreme Value for nEtwork Robustness) score is a way of measuring the robustness of an artificial neural network towards adversarial attacks. It was developed by a team at the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab in IBM Research and first presented at the 2018 International Conference on Learning Representations. It was mentioned and reviewed by Ian Goodfellow as well. It was adopted into an educational game Fool The Bank by Narendra Nath Joshi, Abhishek Bhandwaldar and Casey Dugan

Random forest

Random forests or random decision forests is an ensemble learning method for classification, regression and other tasks that works by creating a multitude of decision trees during training. For classification tasks, the output of the random forest is the class selected by most trees. For regression tasks, the output is the average of the predictions of the trees. Random forests correct for decision trees' habit of overfitting to their training set. The first algorithm for random decision forests was created in 1995 by Tin Kam Ho using the random subspace method, which, in Ho's formulation, is a way to implement the "stochastic discrimination" approach to classification proposed by Eugene Kleinberg. An extension of the algorithm was developed by Leo Breiman and Adele Cutler, who registered "Random Forests" as a trademark in 2006 (as of 2019, owned by Minitab, Inc.). The extension combines Breiman's "bagging" idea and random selection of features, introduced first by Ho and later independently by Amit and Geman in order to construct a collection of decision trees with controlled variance. == History == The general method of random decision forests was first proposed by Salzberg and Heath in 1993, with a method that used a randomized decision tree algorithm to create multiple trees and then combine them using majority voting. This idea was developed further by Ho in 1995. Ho established that forests of trees splitting with oblique hyperplanes can gain accuracy as they grow without suffering from overtraining, as long as the forests are randomly restricted to be sensitive to only selected feature dimensions. A subsequent work along the same lines concluded that other splitting methods behave similarly, as long as they are randomly forced to be insensitive to some feature dimensions. This observation that a more complex classifier (a larger forest) gets more accurate nearly monotonically is in sharp contrast to the common belief that the complexity of a classifier can only grow to a certain level of accuracy before being hurt by overfitting. The explanation of the forest method's resistance to overtraining can be found in Kleinberg's theory of stochastic discrimination. The early development of Breiman's notion of random forests was influenced by the work of Amit and Geman who introduced the idea of searching over a random subset of the available decisions when splitting a node, in the context of growing a single tree. The idea of random subspace selection from Ho was also influential in the design of random forests. This method grows a forest of trees, and introduces variation among the trees by projecting the training data into a randomly chosen subspace before fitting each tree or each node. Finally, the idea of randomized node optimization, where the decision at each node is selected by a randomized procedure, rather than a deterministic optimization was first introduced by Thomas G. Dietterich. The proper introduction of random forests was made in a paper by Leo Breiman, that has become one of the world's most cited papers. This paper describes a method of building a forest of uncorrelated trees using a CART like procedure, combined with randomized node optimization and bagging. In addition, this paper combines several ingredients, some previously known and some novel, which form the basis of the modern practice of random forests, in particular: Using out-of-bag error as an estimate of the generalization error. Measuring variable importance through permutation. The report also offers the first theoretical result for random forests in the form of a bound on the generalization error which depends on the strength of the trees in the forest and their correlation. == Algorithm == === Preliminaries: decision tree learning === Decision trees are a popular method for various machine learning tasks. Tree learning is almost "an off-the-shelf procedure for data mining", say Hastie et al., "because it is invariant under scaling and various other transformations of feature values, is robust to inclusion of irrelevant features, and produces inspectable models. However, they are seldom accurate". In particular, trees that are grown very deep tend to learn highly irregular patterns: they overfit their training sets, i.e. have low bias, but very high variance. Random forests are a way of averaging multiple deep decision trees, trained on different parts of the same training set, with the goal of reducing the variance. This comes at the expense of a small increase in the bias and some loss of interpretability, but generally greatly boosts the performance in the final model. === Bagging === The training algorithm for random forests applies the general technique of bootstrap aggregating, or bagging, to tree learners. Given a training set X = x1, ..., xn with responses Y = y1, ..., yn, bagging repeatedly (B times) selects a random sample with replacement of the training set and fits trees to these samples: After training, predictions for unseen samples x' can be made by averaging the predictions from all the individual regression trees on x': f ^ = 1 B ∑ b = 1 B f b ( x ′ ) {\displaystyle {\hat {f}}={\frac {1}{B}}\sum _{b=1}^{B}f_{b}(x')} or by taking the plurality vote in the case of classification trees. This bootstrapping procedure leads to better model performance because it decreases the variance of the model, without increasing the bias. This means that while the predictions of a single tree are highly sensitive to noise in its training set, the average of many trees is not, as long as the trees are not correlated. Simply training many trees on a single training set would give strongly correlated trees (or even the same tree many times, if the training algorithm is deterministic); bootstrap sampling is a way of de-correlating the trees by showing them different training sets. Additionally, an estimate of the uncertainty of the prediction can be made as the standard deviation of the predictions from all the individual regression trees on x′: σ = ∑ b = 1 B ( f b ( x ′ ) − f ^ ) 2 B − 1 . {\displaystyle \sigma ={\sqrt {\frac {\sum _{b=1}^{B}(f_{b}(x')-{\hat {f}})^{2}}{B-1}}}.} The number B of samples (equivalently, of trees) is a free parameter. Typically, a few hundred to several thousand trees are used, depending on the size and nature of the training set. B can be optimized using cross-validation, or by observing the out-of-bag error: the mean prediction error on each training sample xi, using only the trees that did not have xi in their bootstrap sample. The training and test error tend to level off after some number of trees have been fit. === From bagging to random forests === The above procedure describes the original bagging algorithm for trees. Random forests also include another type of bagging scheme: they use a modified tree learning algorithm that selects, at each candidate split in the learning process, a random subset of the features. This process is sometimes called "feature bagging". The reason for doing this is the correlation of the trees in an ordinary bootstrap sample: if one or a few features are very strong predictors for the response variable (target output), these features will be selected in many of the B trees, causing them to become correlated. An analysis of how bagging and random subspace projection contribute to accuracy gains under different conditions is given by Ho. Typically, for a classification problem with p {\displaystyle p} features, p {\displaystyle {\sqrt {p}}} (rounded down) features are used in each split. For regression problems the inventors recommend p / 3 {\displaystyle p/3} (rounded down) with a minimum node size of 5 as the default. In practice, the best values for these parameters should be tuned on a case-to-case basis for every problem. === ExtraTrees === Adding one further step of randomization yields extremely randomized trees, or ExtraTrees. As with ordinary random forests, they are an ensemble of individual trees, but there are two main differences: (1) each tree is trained using the whole learning sample (rather than a bootstrap sample), and (2) the top-down splitting is randomized: for each feature under consideration, a number of random cut-points are selected, instead of computing the locally optimal cut-point (based on, e.g., information gain or the Gini impurity). The values are chosen from a uniform distribution within the feature's empirical range (in the tree's training set). Then, of all the randomly chosen splits, the split that yields the highest score is chosen to split the node. Similar to ordinary random forests, the number of randomly selected features to be considered at each node can be specified. Default values for this parameter are p {\displaystyle {\sqrt {p}}} for classification and p {\displaystyle p} for regression, where p {\displaystyle p} is the number of features in the model. === Random forests for high-dimensional data === The basic random forest procedure may