In metadata, a vocabulary-based transformation (VBT) is a transformation aided by the use of a semantic equivalence statements within a controlled vocabulary. Many organizations today require communication between two or more computers. Although many standards exist to exchange data between computers such as HTML or email, there is still much structured information that needs to be exchanged between computers that is not standardized. The process of mapping one source of data into another is often a slow and labor-intensive process. VBT is a possible way to avoid much of the time and cost of manual data mapping using traditional extract, transform, load technologies. == History == The term vocabulary-based transformation was first defined by Roy Shulte of the Gartner Group around May 2003 and appeared in annual "hype-cycle" for integration. == Application == VBT allows computer systems integrators to more automatically "look up" the definitions of data elements in a centralized data dictionary and use that definition and the equivalent mappings to transform that data element into a foreign namespace. The Web Ontology Language (OWL) language also support three semantic equivalence statements. == Companies or products == IONA Technologies Contivo and Delta by Liaison Technologies enLeague Systems ItemField Unicorn Solutions Vitria Technology Zonar
Condensation algorithm
The condensation algorithm (Conditional Density Propagation) is a computer vision algorithm. The principal application is to detect and track the contour of objects moving in a cluttered environment. Object tracking is one of the more basic and difficult aspects of computer vision and is generally a prerequisite to object recognition. Being able to identify which pixels in an image make up the contour of an object is a non-trivial problem. Condensation is a probabilistic algorithm that attempts to solve this problem. The algorithm itself is described in detail by Isard and Blake in a publication in the International Journal of Computer Vision in 1998. One of the most interesting facets of the algorithm is that it does not compute on every pixel of the image. Rather, pixels to process are chosen at random, and only a subset of the pixels end up being processed. Multiple hypotheses about what is moving are supported naturally by the probabilistic nature of the approach. The evaluation functions come largely from previous work in the area and include many standard statistical approaches. The original part of this work is the application of particle filter estimation techniques. The algorithm's creation was inspired by the inability of Kalman filtering to perform object tracking well in the presence of significant background clutter. The presence of clutter tends to produce probability distributions for the object state which are multi-modal and therefore poorly modeled by the Kalman filter. The condensation algorithm in its most general form requires no assumptions about the probability distributions of the object or measurements. == Algorithm overview == The condensation algorithm seeks to solve the problem of estimating the conformation of an object described by a vector x t {\displaystyle \mathbf {x_{t}} } at time t {\displaystyle t} , given observations z 1 , . . . , z t {\displaystyle \mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} } of the detected features in the images up to and including the current time. The algorithm outputs an estimate to the state conditional probability density p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} by applying a nonlinear filter based on factored sampling and can be thought of as a development of a Monte-Carlo method. p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} is a representation of the probability of possible conformations for the objects based on previous conformations and measurements. The condensation algorithm is a generative model since it models the joint distribution of the object and the observer. The conditional density of the object at the current time p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} is estimated as a weighted, time-indexed sample set { s t ( n ) , n = 1 , . . . , N } {\displaystyle \{s_{t}^{(n)},n=1,...,N\}} with weights π t ( n ) {\displaystyle \pi _{t}^{(n)}} . N is a parameter determining the number of sample sets chosen. A realization of p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} is obtained by sampling with replacement from the set s t {\displaystyle s_{t}} with probability equal to the corresponding element of π t {\displaystyle \pi _{t}} . The assumptions that object dynamics form a temporal Markov chain and that observations are independent of each other and the dynamics facilitate the implementation of the condensation algorithm. The first assumption allows the dynamics of the object to be entirely determined by the conditional density p ( x t | x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {x_{t-1}} )} . The model of the system dynamics determined by p ( x t | x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {x_{t-1}} )} must also be selected for the algorithm, and generally includes both deterministic and stochastic dynamics. The algorithm can be summarized by initialization at time t = 0 {\displaystyle t=0} and three steps at each time t: === Initialization === Form the initial sample set and weights by sampling according to the prior distribution. For example, specify as Gaussian and set the weights equal to each other. === Iterative procedure === Sample with replacement N {\displaystyle N} times from the set { s 0 ( n ) , n = 1 , . . . , N } {\displaystyle \{s_{0}^{(n)},n=1,...,N\}} with probability { π 0 ( n ) , n = 1 , . . . , N } {\displaystyle \{\pi _{0}^{(n)},n=1,...,N\}} to generate a realization of p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} . Apply the learned dynamics p ( x t | x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {x_{t-1}} )} to each element of this new set, to generate a new set { s t ( n ) } {\displaystyle \{s_{t}^{(n)}\}} . To take into account the current observation z t {\displaystyle \mathbf {z_{t}} } , set π t ( n ) = p ( z t | s ( n ) ) ∑ j = 1 N p ( z t | s ( j ) ) {\displaystyle \pi _{t}^{(n)}={\frac {p(\mathbf {z_{t}} |s^{(n)})}{\sum _{j=1}^{N}p(\mathbf {z_{t}} |s^{(j)})}}} for each element { s t ( n ) } {\displaystyle \{s_{t}^{(n)}\}} . This algorithm outputs the probability distribution p ( x t | z 1 , . . . , z t ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {z_{1},...,z_{t}} )} which can be directly used to calculate the mean position of the tracked object, as well as the other moments of the tracked object. Cumulative weights can instead be used to achieve a more efficient sampling. == Implementation considerations == Since object-tracking can be a real-time objective, consideration of algorithm efficiency becomes important. The condensation algorithm is relatively simple when compared to the computational intensity of the Ricatti equation required for Kalman filtering. The parameter N {\displaystyle N} , which determines the number of samples in the sample set, will clearly hold a trade-off in efficiency versus performance. One way to increase efficiency of the algorithm is by selecting a low degree of freedom model for representing the shape of the object. The model used by Isard 1998 is a linear parameterization of B-splines in which the splines are limited to certain configurations. Suitable configurations were found by analytically determining combinations of contours from multiple views, of the object in different poses, and through principal component analysis (PCA) on the deforming object. Isard and Blake model the object dynamics p ( x t | x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {x_{t-1}} )} as a second order difference equation with deterministic and stochastic components: p ( x t | x t − 1 ) ∝ e − 1 2 | | B − 1 ( ( x t − x ¯ ) − A ( x t − 1 − x ¯ ) ) | | 2 ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {x_{t}} |\mathbf {x_{t-1}} )\propto e^{-{\frac {1}{2}}||B^{-1}((\mathbf {x_{t}} -\mathbf {\bar {x}} )-A(\mathbf {x_{t-1}} -\mathbf {\bar {x}} ))||^{2})}} where x ¯ {\displaystyle \mathbf {\bar {x}} } is the mean value of the state, and A {\displaystyle A} , B {\displaystyle B} are matrices representing the deterministic and stochastic components of the dynamical model respectively. A {\displaystyle A} , B {\displaystyle B} , and x ¯ {\displaystyle \mathbf {\bar {x}} } are estimated via Maximum Likelihood Estimation while the object performs typical movements. The observation model p ( z | x ) {\displaystyle p(\mathbf {z} |\mathbf {x} )} cannot be directly estimated from the data, requiring assumptions to be made in order to estimate it. Isard 1998 assumes that the clutter which may make the object not visible is a Poisson random process with spatial density λ {\displaystyle \lambda } and that any true target measurement is unbiased and normally distributed with standard deviation σ {\displaystyle \sigma } . The basic condensation algorithm is used to track a single object in time. It is possible to extend the condensation algorithm using a single probability distribution to describe the likely states of multiple objects to track multiple objects in a scene at the same time. Since clutter can cause the object probability distribution to split into multiple peaks, each peak represents a hypothesis about the object configuration. Smoothing is a statistical technique of conditioning the distribution based on both past and future measurements once the tracking is complete in order to reduce the effects of multiple peaks. Smoothing cannot be directly done in real-time since it requires information of future measurements. == Applications == The algorithm can be used for vision-based robot localization of mobile robots. Instead of tracking the position of an object in the scene, however, the position of the camera platform is tracked. This allows the camera platform to be globally localized given a visual map of the environment. Extensions of the condensation algorithm have also been used to recognize human gestures in image sequences. This application of the condensation algorithm impacts the ran
Induction of regular languages
In computational learning theory, induction of regular languages refers to the task of learning a formal description (e.g. grammar) of a regular language from a given set of example strings. Although E. Mark Gold has shown that not every regular language can be learned this way (see language identification in the limit), approaches have been investigated for a variety of subclasses. They are sketched in this article. For learning of more general grammars, see Grammar induction. == Definitions == A regular language is defined as a (finite or infinite) set of strings that can be described by one of the mathematical formalisms called "finite automaton", "regular grammar", or "regular expression", all of which have the same expressive power. Since the latter formalism leads to shortest notations, it shall be introduced and used here. Given a set Σ of symbols (a.k.a. alphabet), a regular expression can be any of ∅ (denoting the empty set of strings), ε (denoting the singleton set containing just the empty string), a (where a is any character in Σ; denoting the singleton set just containing the single-character string a), r + s (where r and s are, in turn, simpler regular expressions; denoting their set's union) r ⋅ s (denoting the set of all possible concatenations of strings from r's and s's set), r + (denoting the set of n-fold repetitions of strings from r's set, for any n ≥ 1), or r (similarly denoting the set of n-fold repetitions, but also including the empty string, seen as 0-fold repetition). For example, using Σ = {0,1}, the regular expression (0+1+ε)⋅(0+1) denotes the set of all binary numbers with one or two digits (leading zero allowed), while 1⋅(0+1)⋅0 denotes the (infinite) set of all even binary numbers (no leading zeroes). Given a set of strings (also called "positive examples"), the task of regular language induction is to come up with a regular expression that denotes a set containing all of them. As an example, given {1, 10, 100}, a "natural" description could be the regular expression 1⋅0, corresponding to the informal characterization "a 1 followed by arbitrarily many (maybe even none) 0's". However, (0+1) and 1+(1⋅0)+(1⋅0⋅0) is another regular expression, denoting the largest (assuming Σ = {0,1}) and the smallest set containing the given strings, and called the trivial overgeneralization and undergeneralization, respectively. Some approaches work in an extended setting where also a set of "negative example" strings is given; then, a regular expression is to be found that generates all of the positive, but none of the negative examples. == Lattice of automata == Dupont et al. have shown that the set of all structurally complete finite automata generating a given input set of example strings forms a lattice, with the trivial undergeneralized and the trivial overgeneralized automaton as bottom and top element, respectively. Each member of this lattice can be obtained by factoring the undergeneralized automaton by an appropriate equivalence relation. For the above example string set {1, 10, 100}, the picture shows at its bottom the undergeneralized automaton Aa,b,c,d in grey, consisting of states a, b, c, and d. On the state set {a,b,c,d}, a total of 15 equivalence relations exist, forming a lattice. Mapping each equivalence E to the corresponding quotient automaton language L(Aa,b,c,d / E) obtains the partially ordered set shown in the picture. Each node's language is denoted by a regular expression. The language may be recognized by quotient automata w.r.t. different equivalence relations, all of which are shown below the node. An arrow between two nodes indicates that the lower node's language is a proper subset of the higher node's. If both positive and negative example strings are given, Dupont et al. build the lattice from the positive examples, and then investigate the separation border between automata that generate some negative example and such that do not. Most interesting are those automata immediately below the border. In the picture, separation borders are shown for the negative example strings 11 (green), 1001 (blue), 101 (cyan), and 0 (red). Coste and Nicolas present an own search method within the lattice, which they relate to Mitchell's version space paradigm. To find the separation border, they use a graph coloring algorithm on the state inequality relation induced by the negative examples. Later, they investigate several ordering relations on the set of all possible state fusions. Kudo and Shimbo use the representation by automaton factorizations to give a unique framework for the following approaches (sketched below): k-reversible languages and the "tail clustering" follow-up approach, Successor automata and the predecessor-successor method, and pumping-based approaches (framework-integration challenged by Luzeaux, however). Each of these approaches is shown to correspond to a particular kind of equivalence relations used for factorization. == Approaches == === k-reversible languages === Angluin considers so-called "k-reversible" regular automata, that is, deterministic automata in which each state can be reached from at most one state by following a transition chain of length k. Formally, if Σ, Q, and δ denote the input alphabet, the state set, and the transition function of an automaton A, respectively, then A is called k-reversible if: ∀a0, ..., ak ∈ Σ ∀s1, s2 ∈ Q: δ(s1, a0...ak) = δ(s2, a0...ak) ⇒ s1 = s2, where δ means the homomorphic extension of δ to arbitrary words. Angluin gives a cubic algorithm for learning of the smallest k-reversible language from a given set of input words; for k = 0, the algorithm has even almost linear complexity. The required state uniqueness after k + 1 given symbols forces unifying automaton states, thus leading to a proper generalization different from the trivial undergeneralized automaton. This algorithm has been used to learn simple parts of English syntax; later, an incremental version has been provided. Another approach based on k-reversible automata is the tail clustering method. === Successor automata === From a given set of input strings, Vernadat and Richetin build a so-called successor automaton, consisting of one state for each distinct character and a transition between each two adjacent characters' states. For example, the singleton input set {aabbaabb} leads to an automaton corresponding to the regular expression (a+⋅b+). An extension of this approach is the predecessor-successor method which generalizes each character repetition immediately to a Kleene + and then includes for each character the set of its possible predecessors in its state. Successor automata can learn exactly the class of local languages. Since each regular language is the homomorphic image of a local language, grammars from the former class can be learned by lifting, if an appropriate (depending on the intended application) homomorphism is provided. In particular, there is such a homomorphism for the class of languages learnable by the predecessor-successor method. The learnability of local languages can be reduced to that of k-reversible languages. === Early approaches === Chomsky and Miller (1957) used the pumping lemma: they guess a part v of an input string uvw and try to build a corresponding cycle into the automaton to be learned; using membership queries they ask, for appropriate k, which of the strings uw, uvvw, uvvvw, ..., uvkw also belongs to the language to be learned, thereby refining the structure of their automaton. In 1959, Solomonoff generalized this approach to context-free languages, which also obey a pumping lemma. === Cover automata === Câmpeanu et al. learn a finite automaton as a compact representation of a large finite language. Given such a language F, they search a so-called cover automaton A such that its language L(A) covers F in the following sense: L(A) ∩ Σ≤ l = F, where l is the length of the longest string in F, and Σ≤ l denotes the set of all strings not longer than l. If such a cover automaton exists, F is uniquely determined by A and l. For example, F = {ad, read, reread } has l = 6 and a cover automaton corresponding to the regular expression (r⋅e)⋅a⋅d. For two strings x and y, Câmpeanu et al. define x ~ y if xz ∈ F ⇔ yz ∈ F for all strings z of a length such that both xz and yz are not longer than l. Based on this relation, whose lack of transitivity causes considerable technical problems, they give an O(n4) algorithm to construct from F a cover automaton A of minimal state count. Moreover, for union, intersection, and difference of two finite languages they provide corresponding operations on their cover automata. Păun et al. improve the time complexity to O(n2). === Residual automata === For a set S of strings and a string u, the Brzozowski derivative u−1S is defined as the set of all rest-strings obtainable from a string in S by cutting off its prefix u (if possible), formally: u−1S = {v ∈ Σ: uv ∈ S}, cf. picture. Denis et al. define a
Radial basis function kernel
In machine learning, the radial basis function kernel, or RBF kernel, is a popular kernel function used in various kernelized learning algorithms. In particular, it is commonly used in support vector machine classification. The RBF kernel on two samples x , x ′ ∈ R k {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} ,\mathbf {x'} \in \mathbb {R} ^{k}} , represented as feature vectors in some input space, is defined as K ( x , x ′ ) = exp ( − ‖ x − x ′ ‖ 2 2 σ 2 ) {\displaystyle K(\mathbf {x} ,\mathbf {x'} )=\exp \left(-{\frac {\|\mathbf {x} -\mathbf {x'} \|^{2}}{2\sigma ^{2}}}\right)} ‖ x − x ′ ‖ 2 {\displaystyle \textstyle \|\mathbf {x} -\mathbf {x'} \|^{2}} may be recognized as the squared Euclidean distance between the two feature vectors. σ {\displaystyle \sigma } is a free parameter. An equivalent definition involves a parameter γ = 1 2 σ 2 {\displaystyle \textstyle \gamma ={\tfrac {1}{2\sigma ^{2}}}} : K ( x , x ′ ) = exp ( − γ ‖ x − x ′ ‖ 2 ) {\displaystyle K(\mathbf {x} ,\mathbf {x'} )=\exp(-\gamma \|\mathbf {x} -\mathbf {x'} \|^{2})} Since the value of the RBF kernel decreases with distance and ranges between zero (in the infinite-distance limit) and one (when x = x'), it has a ready interpretation as a similarity measure. The feature space of the kernel has an infinite number of dimensions; for σ = 1 {\displaystyle \sigma =1} , its expansion using the multinomial theorem is: exp ( − 1 2 ‖ x − x ′ ‖ 2 ) = exp ( 2 2 x ⊤ x ′ − 1 2 ‖ x ‖ 2 − 1 2 ‖ x ′ ‖ 2 ) = exp ( x ⊤ x ′ ) exp ( − 1 2 ‖ x ‖ 2 ) exp ( − 1 2 ‖ x ′ ‖ 2 ) = ∑ j = 0 ∞ ( x ⊤ x ′ ) j j ! exp ( − 1 2 ‖ x ‖ 2 ) exp ( − 1 2 ‖ x ′ ‖ 2 ) = ∑ j = 0 ∞ ∑ n 1 + n 2 + ⋯ + n k = j exp ( − 1 2 ‖ x ‖ 2 ) x 1 n 1 ⋯ x k n k n 1 ! ⋯ n k ! exp ( − 1 2 ‖ x ′ ‖ 2 ) x ′ 1 n 1 ⋯ x ′ k n k n 1 ! ⋯ n k ! = ⟨ φ ( x ) , φ ( x ′ ) ⟩ {\displaystyle {\begin{alignedat}{2}\exp \left(-{\frac {1}{2}}\|\mathbf {x} -\mathbf {x'} \|^{2}\right)&=\exp \left({\frac {2}{2}}\mathbf {x} ^{\top }\mathbf {x'} -{\frac {1}{2}}\|\mathbf {x} \|^{2}-{\frac {1}{2}}\|\mathbf {x'} \|^{2}\right)\\[5pt]&=\exp \left(\mathbf {x} ^{\top }\mathbf {x'} \right)\exp \left(-{\frac {1}{2}}\|\mathbf {x} \|^{2}\right)\exp \left(-{\frac {1}{2}}\|\mathbf {x'} \|^{2}\right)\\[5pt]&=\sum _{j=0}^{\infty }{\frac {(\mathbf {x} ^{\top }\mathbf {x'} )^{j}}{j!}}\exp \left(-{\frac {1}{2}}\|\mathbf {x} \|^{2}\right)\exp \left(-{\frac {1}{2}}\|\mathbf {x'} \|^{2}\right)\\[5pt]&=\sum _{j=0}^{\infty }\quad \sum _{n_{1}+n_{2}+\dots +n_{k}=j}\exp \left(-{\frac {1}{2}}\|\mathbf {x} \|^{2}\right){\frac {x_{1}^{n_{1}}\cdots x_{k}^{n_{k}}}{\sqrt {n_{1}!\cdots n_{k}!}}}\exp \left(-{\frac {1}{2}}\|\mathbf {x'} \|^{2}\right){\frac {{x'}_{1}^{n_{1}}\cdots {x'}_{k}^{n_{k}}}{\sqrt {n_{1}!\cdots n_{k}!}}}\\[5pt]&=\langle \varphi (\mathbf {x} ),\varphi (\mathbf {x'} )\rangle \end{alignedat}}} φ ( x ) = exp ( − 1 2 ‖ x ‖ 2 ) ( a ℓ 0 ( 0 ) , a 1 ( 1 ) , … , a ℓ 1 ( 1 ) , … , a 1 ( j ) , … , a ℓ j ( j ) , … ) {\displaystyle \varphi (\mathbf {x} )=\exp \left(-{\frac {1}{2}}\|\mathbf {x} \|^{2}\right)\left(a_{\ell _{0}}^{(0)},a_{1}^{(1)},\dots ,a_{\ell _{1}}^{(1)},\dots ,a_{1}^{(j)},\dots ,a_{\ell _{j}}^{(j)},\dots \right)} where ℓ j = ( k + j − 1 j ) {\displaystyle \ell _{j}={\tbinom {k+j-1}{j}}} , a ℓ ( j ) = x 1 n 1 ⋯ x k n k n 1 ! ⋯ n k ! | n 1 + n 2 + ⋯ + n k = j ∧ 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ ℓ j {\displaystyle a_{\ell }^{(j)}={\frac {x_{1}^{n_{1}}\cdots x_{k}^{n_{k}}}{\sqrt {n_{1}!\cdots n_{k}!}}}\quad |\quad n_{1}+n_{2}+\dots +n_{k}=j\wedge 1\leq \ell \leq \ell _{j}} == Approximations == Because support vector machines and other models employing the kernel trick do not scale well to large numbers of training samples or large numbers of features in the input space, several approximations to the RBF kernel (and similar kernels) have been introduced. Typically, these take the form of a function z that maps a single vector to a vector of higher dimensionality, approximating the kernel: ⟨ z ( x ) , z ( x ′ ) ⟩ ≈ ⟨ φ ( x ) , φ ( x ′ ) ⟩ = K ( x , x ′ ) {\displaystyle \langle z(\mathbf {x} ),z(\mathbf {x'} )\rangle \approx \langle \varphi (\mathbf {x} ),\varphi (\mathbf {x'} )\rangle =K(\mathbf {x} ,\mathbf {x'} )} where φ {\displaystyle \textstyle \varphi } is the implicit mapping embedded in the RBF kernel. === Fourier random features === One way to construct such a z is to randomly sample from the Fourier transformation of the kernel φ ( x ) = 1 D [ cos ⟨ w 1 , x ⟩ , sin ⟨ w 1 , x ⟩ , … , cos ⟨ w D , x ⟩ , sin ⟨ w D , x ⟩ ] T {\displaystyle \varphi (x)={\frac {1}{\sqrt {D}}}[\cos \langle w_{1},x\rangle ,\sin \langle w_{1},x\rangle ,\ldots ,\cos \langle w_{D},x\rangle ,\sin \langle w_{D},x\rangle ]^{T}} where w 1 , . . . , w D {\displaystyle w_{1},...,w_{D}} are independent samples from the normal distribution N ( 0 , σ − 2 I ) {\displaystyle N(0,\sigma ^{-2}I)} . Theorem: E [ ⟨ φ ( x ) , φ ( y ) ⟩ ] = e ‖ x − y ‖ 2 / ( 2 σ 2 ) . {\displaystyle \operatorname {E} [\langle \varphi (x),\varphi (y)\rangle ]=e^{\|x-y\|^{2}/(2\sigma ^{2})}.} Proof: It suffices to prove the case of D = 1 {\displaystyle D=1} . Use the trigonometric identity cos ( a − b ) = cos ( a ) cos ( b ) + sin ( a ) sin ( b ) {\displaystyle \cos(a-b)=\cos(a)\cos(b)+\sin(a)\sin(b)} , the spherical symmetry of Gaussian distribution, then evaluate the integral ∫ − ∞ ∞ cos ( k x ) e − x 2 / 2 2 π d x = e − k 2 / 2 . {\displaystyle \int _{-\infty }^{\infty }{\frac {\cos(kx)e^{-x^{2}/2}}{\sqrt {2\pi }}}dx=e^{-k^{2}/2}.} Theorem: Var [ ⟨ φ ( x ) , φ ( y ) ⟩ ] = O ( D − 1 ) {\displaystyle \operatorname {Var} [\langle \varphi (x),\varphi (y)\rangle ]=O(D^{-1})} . (Appendix A.2). === Nyström method === Another approach uses the Nyström method to approximate the eigendecomposition of the Gram matrix K, using only a random sample of the training set.
FastICA
FastICA is an efficient and popular algorithm for independent component analysis invented by Aapo Hyvärinen at Helsinki University of Technology. Like most ICA algorithms, FastICA seeks an orthogonal rotation of prewhitened data, through a fixed-point iteration scheme, that maximizes a measure of non-Gaussianity of the rotated components. Non-gaussianity serves as a proxy for statistical independence, which is a very strong condition and requires infinite data to verify. FastICA can also be alternatively derived as an approximative Newton iteration. == Algorithm == === Prewhitening the data === Let the X := ( x i j ) ∈ R N × M {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} :=(x_{ij})\in \mathbb {R} ^{N\times M}} denote the input data matrix, M {\displaystyle M} the number of columns corresponding with the number of samples of mixed signals and N {\displaystyle N} the number of rows corresponding with the number of independent source signals. The input data matrix X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } must be prewhitened, or centered and whitened, before applying the FastICA algorithm to it. Centering the data entails demeaning each component of the input data X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } , that is, for each i = 1 , … , N {\displaystyle i=1,\ldots ,N} and j = 1 , … , M {\displaystyle j=1,\ldots ,M} . After centering, each row of X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } has an expected value of 0 {\displaystyle 0} . Whitening the data requires a linear transformation L : R N × M → R N × M {\displaystyle \mathbf {L} :\mathbb {R} ^{N\times M}\to \mathbb {R} ^{N\times M}} of the centered data so that the components of L ( X ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {L} (\mathbf {X} )} are uncorrelated and have variance one. More precisely, if X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } is a centered data matrix, the covariance of L x := L ( X ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {L} _{\mathbf {x} }:=\mathbf {L} (\mathbf {X} )} is the ( N × N ) {\displaystyle (N\times N)} -dimensional identity matrix, that is, A common method for whitening is by performing an eigenvalue decomposition on the covariance matrix of the centered data X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } , E { X X T } = E D E T {\displaystyle E\left\{\mathbf {X} \mathbf {X} ^{T}\right\}=\mathbf {E} \mathbf {D} \mathbf {E} ^{T}} , where E {\displaystyle \mathbf {E} } is the matrix of eigenvectors and D {\displaystyle \mathbf {D} } is the diagonal matrix of eigenvalues. The whitened data matrix is defined thus by === Single component extraction === The iterative algorithm finds the direction for the weight vector w ∈ R N {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} \in \mathbb {R} ^{N}} that maximizes a measure of non-Gaussianity of the projection w T X {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} ^{T}\mathbf {X} } , with X ∈ R N × M {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} \in \mathbb {R} ^{N\times M}} denoting a prewhitened data matrix as described above. Note that w {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} } is a column vector. To measure non-Gaussianity, FastICA relies on a nonquadratic nonlinear function f ( u ) {\displaystyle f(u)} , its first derivative g ( u ) {\displaystyle g(u)} , and its second derivative g ′ ( u ) {\displaystyle g^{\prime }(u)} . Hyvärinen states that the functions are useful for general purposes, while may be highly robust. The steps for extracting the weight vector w {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} } for single component in FastICA are the following: Randomize the initial weight vector w {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} } Let w + ← E { X g ( w T X ) T } − E { g ′ ( w T X ) } w {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} ^{+}\leftarrow E\left\{\mathbf {X} g(\mathbf {w} ^{T}\mathbf {X} )^{T}\right\}-E\left\{g'(\mathbf {w} ^{T}\mathbf {X} )\right\}\mathbf {w} } , where E { . . . } {\displaystyle E\left\{...\right\}} means averaging over all column-vectors of matrix X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } Let w ← w + / ‖ w + ‖ {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} \leftarrow \mathbf {w} ^{+}/\|\mathbf {w} ^{+}\|} If not converged, go back to 2 === Multiple component extraction === The single unit iterative algorithm estimates only one weight vector which extracts a single component. Estimating additional components that are mutually "independent" requires repeating the algorithm to obtain linearly independent projection vectors - note that the notion of independence here refers to maximizing non-Gaussianity in the estimated components. Hyvärinen provides several ways of extracting multiple components with the simplest being the following. Here, 1 M {\displaystyle \mathbf {1_{M}} } is a column vector of 1's of dimension M {\displaystyle M} . Algorithm FastICA Input: C {\displaystyle C} Number of desired components Input: X ∈ R N × M {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} \in \mathbb {R} ^{N\times M}} Prewhitened matrix, where each column represents an N {\displaystyle N} -dimensional sample, where C <= N {\displaystyle C<=N} Output: W ∈ R N × C {\displaystyle \mathbf {W} \in \mathbb {R} ^{N\times C}} Un-mixing matrix where each column projects X {\displaystyle \mathbf {X} } onto independent component. Output: S ∈ R C × M {\displaystyle \mathbf {S} \in \mathbb {R} ^{C\times M}} Independent components matrix, with M {\displaystyle M} columns representing a sample with C {\displaystyle C} dimensions. for p in 1 to C: w p ← {\displaystyle \mathbf {w_{p}} \leftarrow } Random vector of length N while w p {\displaystyle \mathbf {w_{p}} } changes w p ← 1 M X g ( w p T X ) T − 1 M g ′ ( w p T X ) 1 M w p {\displaystyle \mathbf {w_{p}} \leftarrow {\frac {1}{M}}\mathbf {X} g(\mathbf {w_{p}} ^{T}\mathbf {X} )^{T}-{\frac {1}{M}}g'(\mathbf {w_{p}} ^{T}\mathbf {X} )\mathbf {1_{M}} \mathbf {w_{p}} } w p ← w p − ∑ j = 1 p − 1 ( w p T w j ) w j {\displaystyle \mathbf {w_{p}} \leftarrow \mathbf {w_{p}} -\sum _{j=1}^{p-1}(\mathbf {w_{p}} ^{T}\mathbf {w_{j}} )\mathbf {w_{j}} } w p ← w p ‖ w p ‖ {\displaystyle \mathbf {w_{p}} \leftarrow {\frac {\mathbf {w_{p}} }{\|\mathbf {w_{p}} \|}}} output W ← [ w 1 , … , w C ] {\displaystyle \mathbf {W} \leftarrow {\begin{bmatrix}\mathbf {w_{1}} ,\dots ,\mathbf {w_{C}} \end{bmatrix}}} output S ← W T X {\displaystyle \mathbf {S} \leftarrow \mathbf {W^{T}} \mathbf {X} }
Lenny (chatbot)
Lenny is a chatbot designed to scam bait telemarketers, scammers, and other unwanted incoming calls using messages. == Background == Telemarketers may be perceived by some as annoying and wasting people's time, and some deliberately attempt to scam or defraud people. In April 2018, stats published by YouMail estimated the United States received over three billion robocalls that month. Attempts to block the callers have been hindered by Caller ID spoofing. == Features == The bot was written in 2011, and development taken over by an Alberta-based programmer known as "Mango" two years later. It is driven by sixteen pre-recorded audio clips, spoken in a soft and slow Australian accent in the manner of an elderly man. The bot's original creator stated on Reddit that in building the character he asked himself the question "What would be a telemarketer's worst nightmare?" He answered with this being a lonely old man who is up for a chat, proud of his family and can't focus on the telemarketer's goal. There is no speech recognition or artificial intelligence, and the bot's software is simple and straightforward. The first four clips are played sequentially in order to grab the telemarketer's interest and begin their sales pitch to Lenny, then the remaining twelve are played sequentially on loop until the telemarketer hangs up. The program waits for a gap of 1.5 seconds of silence before playing the next audio clip, to simulate natural breaks in the conversation. The messages are purposefully vague and open-ended so they can be applied to as many conversations as possible. They include references to Lenny's children, the state of the economy, and being interrupted by some ducks outside. According to research into the bot, around 75% of callers realise they are talking to a computer program within two minutes; however, some calls have lasted around an hour. == Distribution == Though other chatbots had been developed earlier, Lenny was the first one to be released for free on a public server and could be accessed by anyone. Recordings of conversations with the bot are widely shared online on websites such as Reddit and YouTube. Though "Mango" only intended Lenny to be used against dishonest telemarketers, such as scammers, he does not mind it being used against callers who are merely annoying. The bot has also been used against political campaigners, such as a supporter of Pierre Poilievre in the 2015 Canadian federal election.
Mating pool
Mating pool is a concept used in evolutionary algorithms and means a population of parents for the next population. The mating pool is formed by candidate solutions that the selection operators deem to have the highest fitness in the current population. Solutions that are included in the mating pool are referred to as parents. Individual solutions can be repeatedly included in the mating pool, with individuals of higher fitness values having a higher chance of being included multiple times. Crossover operators are then applied to the parents, resulting in recombination of genes recognized as superior. Lastly, random changes in the genes are introduced through mutation operators, increasing the genetic variation in the gene pool. Those two operators improve the chance of creating new, superior solutions. A new generation of solutions is thereby created, the children, who will constitute the next population. Depending on the selection method, the total number of parents in the mating pool can be different to the size of the initial population, resulting in a new population that’s smaller. To continue the algorithm with an equally sized population, random individuals from the old populations can be chosen and added to the new population. At this point, the fitness value of the new solutions is evaluated. If the termination conditions are fulfilled, processes come to an end. Otherwise, they are repeated. The repetition of the steps result in candidate solutions that evolve towards the most optimal solution over time. The genes will become increasingly uniform towards the most optimal gene, a process called convergence. If 95% of the population share the same version of a gene, the gene has converged. When all the individual fitness values have reached the value of the best individual, i.e. all the genes have converged, population convergence is achieved. == Mating pool creation == Several methods can be applied to create a mating pool. All of these processes involve the selective breeding of a particular number of individuals within a population. There are multiple criteria that can be employed to determine which individuals make it into the mating pool and which are left behind. The selection methods can be split into three general types: fitness proportionate selection, ordinal based selection and threshold based selection. === Fitness proportionate selection === In the case of fitness proportionate selection, random individuals are selected to enter the pool. However, the ones with a higher level of fitness are more likely to be picked and therefore have a greater chance of passing on their features to the next generation. One of the techniques used in this type of parental selection is the roulette wheel selection. This approach divides a hypothetical circular wheel into different slots, the size of which is equal to the fitness values of each potential candidate. Afterwards, the wheel is rotated and a fixed point determines which individual gets picked. The greater the fitness value of an individual, the higher the probability of being chosen as a parent by the random spin of the wheel. Alternatively, stochastic universal sampling can be implemented. This selection method is also based on the rotation of a spinning wheel. However, in this case there is more than one fixed point and as a result all of the mating pool members will be selected simultaneously. === Ordinal based selection === The ordinal based selection methods include the tournament and ranking selection. Tournament selection involves the random selection of individuals of a population and the subsequent comparison of their fitness levels. The winners of these “tournaments” are the ones with the highest values and will be put into the mating pool as parents. In ranking selection all the individuals are sorted based on their fitness values. Then, the selection of the parents is made according to the rank of the candidates. Every individual has a chance of being chosen, but higher ranked ones are favored === Threshold based selection === The last type of selection method is referred to as the threshold based method. This includes the truncation selection method, which sorts individuals based on their phenotypic values on a specific trait and later selects the proportion of them that are within a certain threshold as parents.