Factorial Hidden Markov Models

We present a framework for learning in hidden Markov models with distributed state representations. Within this framework, we derive a learning algorithm based on the Expectation--Maximization (EM) procedure for maximum likelihood estimation. Analogous to the standard Baum-Welch update rules, the M-step of our algorithm is exact and can be solved analytically. However, due to the combinatorial nature of the hidden state representation, the exact E-step is intractable. A simple and tractable mean field approximation is derived. Empirical results on a set of problems suggest that both the mean field approximation and Gibbs sampling are viable alternatives to the computationally expensive exact algorithm.

Automated Reasoning About Classical Mechanics

In recent years, researchers in artificial intelligence have become interested in replicating human physical reasoning talents in computers. One of the most important skills in this area is predicting how physical systems will behave. This thesis discusses an implemented program that generates algebraic descriptions of how systems of rigid bodies evolve over time. Discussion about the design of this program identifies a physical reasoning paradigm and knowledge representation approach based on mathematical model construction and algebraic reasoning. This paradigm offers several advantages over methods that have become popular in the field, and seems promising for reasoning about a wide variety of classical mechanics problems.

Measure Fields for Function Approximation

The computation of a piecewise smooth function that approximates a finite set of data points may be decomposed into two decoupled tasks: first, the computation of the locally smooth models, and hence, the segmentation of the data into classes that consist on the sets of points best approximated by each model, and second, the computation of the normalized discriminant functions for each induced class. The approximating function may then be computed as the optimal estimator with respect to this measure field. We give an efficient procedure for effecting both computations, and for the determination of the optimal number of components.

Notes on PCA, Regularization, Sparsity and Support Vector Machines

We derive a new representation for a function as a linear combination of local correlation kernels at optimal sparse locations and discuss its relation to PCA, regularization, sparsity principles and Support Vector Machines. We first review previous results for the approximation of a function from discrete data (Girosi, 1998) in the context of Vapnik"s feature space and dual representation (Vapnik, 1995). We apply them to show 1) that a standard regularization functional with a stabilizer defined in terms of the correlation function induces a regression function in the span of the feature space of classical Principal Components and 2) that there exist a dual representations of the regression function in terms of a regularization network with a kernel equal to a generalized correlation function. We then describe the main observation of the paper: the dual representation in terms of the correlation function can be sparsified using the Support Vector Machines (Vapnik, 1982) technique and this operation is equivalent to sparsify a large dictionary of basis functions adapted to the task, using a variation of Basis Pursuit De-Noising (Chen, Donoho and Saunders, 1995; see also related work by Donahue and Geiger, 1994; Olshausen and Field, 1995; Lewicki and Sejnowski, 1998). In addition to extending the close relations between regularization, Support Vector Machines and sparsity, our work also illuminates and formalizes the LFA concept of Penev and Atick (1996). We discuss the relation between our results, which are about regression, and the different problem of pattern classification.

An Equivalence Between Sparse Approximation and Support Vector Machines

In the first part of this paper we show a similarity between the principle of Structural Risk Minimization Principle (SRM) (Vapnik, 1982) and the idea of Sparse Approximation, as defined in (Chen, Donoho and Saunders, 1995) and Olshausen and Field (1996). Then we focus on two specific (approximate) implementations of SRM and Sparse Approximation, which have been used to solve the problem of function approximation. For SRM we consider the Support Vector Machine technique proposed by V. Vapnik and his team at AT&T Bell Labs, and for Sparse Approximation we consider a modification of the Basis Pursuit De-Noising algorithm proposed by Chen, Donoho and Saunders (1995). We show that, under certain conditions, these two techniques are equivalent: they give the same solution and they require the solution of the same quadratic programming problem.