Loading in 5 sec....

Machine Learning and ReviewPowerPoint Presentation

Machine Learning and Review

- By
**jaden** - Follow User

- 430 Views
- Updated On :

Machine Learning and Review Reading: C. 18 Bayesian Approach Each observed training example can incrementally decrease or increase probability of hypothesis instead of eliminate an hypothesis Prior knowledge can be combined with observed data to determine hypothesis

Related searches for Machine Learning and Review

Download Presentation
## PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Machine Learning and Review' - jaden

**An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation**

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

### Machine Learning and Review

Reading: C. 18

Bayesian Approach

- Each observed training example can incrementally decrease or increase probability of hypothesis instead of eliminate an hypothesis
- Prior knowledge can be combined with observed data to determine hypothesis
- Bayesian methods can accommodate hypotheses that make probabilistic predictions
- New instances can be classified by combining the predictions of multiple hypotheses, weighted by their probabilities

Applying Bayes Theorem Prior probability P(D|h) = probability of observing data D given some world where hypothesis holds Bayes theorem:

- Best hypothesis = most probable hypothesis
- Maximum a posteriori (MAP) hypothesis

- Variables
- h = hypothesis
- D = data

- h: P(h)
- training data observed: P(D)

- P(h|D) = P(D|h)*P(h) P(D)

Defining the MAP hypothesis

- hMAP=argmax P(h|D) hεH
- hMAP=argmax P(D|h)*P(h) hεH P(D)
(Using Bayes Theorem)

- hMAP=argmax P(D|h)*P(h) hεH (P(D) is a constant independent of h)
- hMAP=argmax P(D|h) hεH(when we can make the assumption that each hypothesis h is equally probable)

Bayes Optimal Classifier

- The most probable classification of the new instance by combining the predictions of all hypotheses weighted by their posterior probabilities
- Possible classifications: vjεV
- Argmax ∑ P(vj|hi)P(hi|D)vjεVhiεH

Example

- V = {p, n}
- P(h1|D)=.4 P(p|h1)=0 P(n,h1)=1
- P(h2|D)=.3 P(p|h2)=1 P(n,h2)=0
- P(h3|D)=.3 P(p|h3)=1 P(n,h3)=0
- ∑ P(n|hi)P(hi|D) = .4hiεH
- ∑ P(p|hi)P(hi|D) = .6
hiεH

- Argmax ∑ P(vj|hi)P(hi|D) = p
vjε{p,n}hiεH

Properties of Bayesian Approach

- Bayesian learning is optimal
- Easy to estimate P(h) by counting in training data
- Estimating P(D|h) not feasible
- Why?

Naïve Bayes

- Assume independence of attributes
- D = a1,a2,…an
- P(a1,a2,…an|vj)=∏P(ai|vj)i

- Substitute into VMAP formula
- VNB=argmax P(vj)∏P(ai|vj) vjV i

VNB=argmax P(vj)∏P(ai|vj) vjV

Estimating Probabilities

- What happens when the number of data elements is small?
- Suppose true P(S-length=high|verginica)=.05
- There are only 2 instances with C=Verginica
- We estimate probability by nc/n or #S-length|Verginica/C-Verginica
- #S-length|Verginica must = 0
- Then, instead of .05 we use estimated probability of 0
- Two problems
- Biased underestimate of probability
- This probability term will dominate

Instead

- Use priors as well
- nc+mp n+m
- Where p = prior estimate
- M is a constant called the equivalent sample size
- Determines how heavily to weight p relative to observed data
- Typical method: assume a uniform prior

Benefits of Naïve Bayes

- Practical
- As effective and in some cases, more so, than other machine learners

Review for Midterm Constraint propagation Game playing Bayesian Nets A little on machine learning

- Concepts you should know
- Search algorithms
- Depth-first, breadth-first, iterative deepening, A*, greedy, hill-climbing, beam

Midterm format

- Multiple choice
- Short answer questions
- Problem solving
- Essay
- An example midterm will be posted under links

Concepts

- Any words in yellow or light blue or pink on slides

Uninformed Search

- Depth-first
- Breadth-first
- Iterative Deepening

Formulating Problems as Search

Given an initial state and a goal, find the sequence of actions leading through a sequence of states to the final goal state.

Terms:

- Successor function: given action and state, returns {action, successors}
- State space: the set of all states reachable from the initial state
- Path: a sequence of states connected by actions
- Goal test: is a given state the goal state?
- Path cost: function assigning a numeric cost to each path
- Solution: a path from initial state to goal state

Breadth first End while

- OPEN = start node; CLOSED = empty
- While OPEN is not empty do
- Remove leftmost state from OPEN, call it X
- If X = goal state, return success
- Put X on CLOSED
- SUCCESSORS = Successor function (X)
- Remove any successors on OPEN or CLOSED
- Put remaining successors on right end of OPEN

Depth-first End while

- OPEN = start node; CLOSED = empty
- While OPEN is not empty do
- Remove leftmost state from OPEN, call it X
- If X = goal state, return success
- Put X on CLOSED
- SUCCESSORS = Successor function (X)
- Remove any successors on OPEN or CLOSED
- Put remaining successors on left end of OPEN

Can we combine benefits of both? Iterative deepening

- Depth limited
- Select some limit in depth to explore the problem using DFS
- How do we select the limit?

- DFS with depth 1
- DFS with depth 2 up to depth d

Complexity Analysis

- Completeness: is the algorithm guaranteed to find a solution when there is one?
- Optimality: Does the strategy find the optimal solution?
- Time: How long does it take to find a solution?
- Space: How much memory is needed to perform the search?
Is this notion of completeness the same as completeness in logic?

Cost variables Depth: d Path length: m

- Time: number of nodes generated
- Space: maximum number of nodes stored in memory
- Branching factor: b
- Maximum number of successors of any node

- Depth of shallowest goal node

- Maximum length of any path in the state space

Informed Search Online search will not be on midterm

- Best-first
- A*
- Greedy
- Hill climbing
- Variants
- Randomness, Simulated annealing, Local beam search,

Greedy Search End while

- OPEN = start node; CLOSED = empty
- While OPEN is not empty do
- Remove leftmost state from OPEN, call it X
- If X = goal state, return success
- Put X on CLOSED
- SUCCESSORS = Successor function (X)
- Remove any successors on OPEN or CLOSED
- Compute heuristic function for each node
- Put remaining successors on either end of OPEN
- Sort nodes on OPEN by value of heuristic function

A* Search f(n) is the estimated cost of cheapest solution that passes through n If h(n) is an underestimate of true cost to goal

- Try to expand node that is on least cost path to goal
- Evaluation function = f(n)
- f(n)=g(n)+h(n)
- h(n) is heuristic function: cost from node to goal
- g(n) is cost from initial state to node

- A* is complete
- A* is optimal
- A* is optimally efficient: no other algorithm using h(n) is guaranteed to expand fewer states

Admissable heuristics

- A heuristic that never overestimates the cost to the goal
- h1 and h2 are admissable heuristics
- Consistency: the estimated cost of reaching the goal from n is no greater than the step cost of getting to n’ plus estimated cost to goal from n’
- h(n) <=c(n,a,n’)+h(n’)

Local Search Algorithms

- Operate using a single current state
- Move only to neighbors of the state
- Paths followed by search are not retained
- Iterative improvement
- Keep a single current state and try to improve it

Problems for hill climbing

When the higher the heuristic function the better: maxima (objective fns); when the lower the function the better: minima (cost fns)

- Local maxima: A local maximum is a peak that is higher than each of its neighboring states, but lower than the global maximum
- Ridges: a sequence of local maxima
- Plateaux: an area of the state space landscape where the evaluation function is flat

Some solutions First-choice hill climbing Random-restart hill climbing Simulated annealing Local beam search

- Stochastic hill-climbing
- Chose at random from among the uphill moves

- Generates successors randomly until one is generated that is better than current state

- Keep restarting from randomly generated initial states, stopping when goal is found

- Generate a random move. Accept if improvement. Otherwise accept with continually decreasing probability.

- Keep track of k states rather than just 1

CSP algorithm Goal test: the current assignment is complete Path cost: a constant cost for every step

Depth-first search often used

- Initial state: the empty assignment {}; all variables are unassigned
- Successor fn: assign a value to any variable, provided no conflicts w/constraints
- All CSP search algorithms generate successors by considering possible assignments for only a single variable at each node in the search tree

Local search Hill-climbing methods are appropriate

- Complete-state formulation
- Every state is a compete assignment that might or might not satisfy the constraints

General purpose methods for efficient implementation

- Which variable should be assigned next?
- in what order should its values be tried?
- Can we detect inevitable failure early?
- Can we take advantage of problem structure?

Order What if there are >1?

- Choose the most constrained variable first
- The variable with the fewest remaining values
- Minimum Remaining Values (MRV) heuristic

- Tie breaker: Most constraining variable
- Choose the variable with the most constraints on remaining variables

Order on value choice

- Given a variable, chose the least constraining value
- The value that rules out the fewest values in the remaining variables

Forward Checking

- Keep track of remaining legal values for unassigned variables
- Terminate search when any variable has no legal values

Game Playing

- Minimax
- Alpha-beta pruning
- Evaluation function (what is the difference between a cost function, a utility function, a heuristic function, an evaluation function?)

Bayesian nets

- Example problem

Download Presentation

Connecting to Server..