Equivalence and Reduction of Hidden Markov Models

This report studies when and why two Hidden Markov Models (HMMs) may represent the same stochastic process. HMMs are characterized in terms of equivalence classes whose elements represent identical stochastic processes. This characterization yields polynomial time algorithms to detect equivalent HMMs. We also find fast algorithms to reduce HMMs to essentially unique and minimal canonical representations. The reduction to a canonical form leads to the definition of 'Generalized Markov Models' which are essentially HMMs without the positivity constraint on their parameters. We discuss how this generalization can yield more parsimonious representations of stochastic processes at the cost of the probabilistic interpretation of the model parameters.

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.

Type-alpha DPLs

This paper introduces Denotational Proof Languages (DPLs). DPLs are languages for presenting, discovering, and checking formal proofs. In particular, in this paper we discus type-alpha DPLs---a simple class of DPLs for which termination is guaranteed and proof checking can be performed in time linear in the size of the proof. Type-alpha DPLs allow for lucid proof presentation and for efficient proof checking, but not for proof search. Type-omega DPLs allow for search as well as simple presentation and checking, but termination is no longer guaranteed and proof checking may diverge. We do not study type-omega DPLs here. We start by listing some common characteristics of DPLs. We then illustrate with a particularly simple example: a toy type-alpha DPL called PAR, for deducing parities. We present the abstract syntax of PAR, followed by two different kinds of formal semantics: evaluation and denotational. We then relate the two semantics and show how proof checking becomes tantamount to evaluation. We proceed to develop the proof theory of PAR, formulating and studying certain key notions such as observational equivalence that pervade all DPLs. We then present NDL, a type-alpha DPL for classical zero-order natural deduction. Our presentation of NDL mirrors that of PAR, showing how every basic concept that was introduced in PAR resurfaces in NDL. We present sample proofs of several well-known tautologies of propositional logic that demonstrate our thesis that DPL proofs are readable, writable, and concise. Next we contrast DPLs to typed logics based on the Curry-Howard isomorphism, and discuss the distinction between pure and augmented DPLs. Finally we consider the issue of implementing DPLs, presenting an implementation of PAR in SML and one in Athena, and end with some concluding remarks.