Models of Noise and Robust Estimates

Given n noisy observations g; of the same quantity f, it is common use to give an estimate of f by minimizing the function Eni=1(gi-f)2. From a statistical point of view this corresponds to computing the Maximum likelihood estimate, under the assumption of Gaussian noise. However, it is well known that this choice leads to results that are very sensitive to the presence of outliers in the data. For this reason it has been proposed to minimize the functions of the form Eni=1V(gi-f), where V is a function that increases less rapidly than the square. Several choices for V have been proposed and successfully used to obtain "robust" estimates. In this paper we show that, for a class of functions V, using these robust estimators corresponds to assuming that data are corrupted by Gaussian noise whose variance fluctuates according to some given probability distribution, that uniquely determines the shape of V.

Algebraic Functions For Recognition

In the general case, a trilinear relationship between three perspective views is shown to exist. The trilinearity result is shown to be of much practical use in visual recognition by alignment --- yielding a direct method that cuts through the computations of camera transformation, scene structure and epipolar geometry. The proof of the central result may be of further interest as it demonstrates certain regularities across homographies of the plane and introduces new view invariants. Experiments on simulated and real image data were conducted, including a comparative analysis with epipolar intersection and the linear combination methods, with results indicating a greater degree of robustness in practice and a higher level of performance in re-projection tasks.

On the Relationship Between Generalization Error, Hypothesis Complexity, and Sample Complexity for Radial Basis Functions

In this paper, we bound the generalization error of a class of Radial Basis Function networks, for certain well defined function learning tasks, in terms of the number of parameters and number of examples. We show that the total generalization error is partly due to the insufficient representational capacity of the network (because of its finite size) and partly due to insufficient information about the target function (because of finite number of samples). We make several observations about generalization error which are valid irrespective of the approximation scheme. Our result also sheds light on ways to choose an appropriate network architecture for a particular problem.

Learning Fine Motion by Markov Mixtures of Experts

Compliant control is a standard method for performing fine manipulation tasks, like grasping and assembly, but it requires estimation of the state of contact between the robot arm and the objects involved. Here we present a method to learn a model of the movement from measured data. The method requires little or no prior knowledge and the resulting model explicitly estimates the state of contact. The current state of contact is viewed as the hidden state variable of a discrete HMM. The control dependent transition probabilities between states are modeled as parametrized functions of the measurement We show that their parameters can be estimated from measurements concurrently with the estimation of the parameters of the movement in each state of contact. The learning algorithm is a variant of the EM procedure. The E step is computed exactly; solving the M step exactly would require solving a set of coupled nonlinear algebraic equations in the parameters. Instead, gradient ascent is used to produce an increase in likelihood.

Learning Linear, Sparse, Factorial Codes

In previous work (Olshausen & Field 1996), an algorithm was described for learning linear sparse codes which, when trained on natural images, produces a set of basis functions that are spatially localized, oriented, and bandpass (i.e., wavelet-like). This note shows how the algorithm may be interpreted within a maximum-likelihood framework. Several useful insights emerge from this connection: it makes explicit the relation to statistical independence (i.e., factorial coding), it shows a formal relationship to the algorithm of Bell and Sejnowski (1995), and it suggests how to adapt parameters that were previously fixed.

Priors Stabilizers and Basis Functions: From Regularization to Radial, Tensor and Additive Splines

We had previously shown that regularization principles lead to approximation schemes, as Radial Basis Functions, which are equivalent to networks with one layer of hidden units, called Regularization Networks. In this paper we show that regularization networks encompass a much broader range of approximation schemes, including many of the popular general additive models, Breiman's hinge functions and some forms of Projection Pursuit Regression. In the probabilistic interpretation of regularization, the different classes of basis functions correspond to different classes of prior probabilities on the approximating function spaces, and therefore to different types of smoothness assumptions. In the final part of the paper, we also show a relation between activation functions of the Gaussian and sigmoidal type.

On the Noise Model of Support Vector Machine Regression

Support Vector Machines Regression (SVMR) is a regression technique which has been recently introduced by V. Vapnik and his collaborators (Vapnik, 1995; Vapnik, Golowich and Smola, 1996). In SVMR the goodness of fit is measured not by the usual quadratic loss function (the mean square error), but by a different loss function called Vapnik"s $epsilon$- insensitive loss function, which is similar to the "robust" loss functions introduced by Huber (Huber, 1981). The quadratic loss function is well justified under the assumption of Gaussian additive noise. However, the noise model underlying the choice of Vapnik's loss function is less clear. In this paper the use of Vapnik's loss function is shown to be equivalent to a model of additive and Gaussian noise, where the variance and mean of the Gaussian are random variables. The probability distributions for the variance and mean will be stated explicitly. While this work is presented in the framework of SVMR, it can be extended to justify non-quadratic loss functions in any Maximum Likelihood or Maximum A Posteriori approach. It applies not only to Vapnik's loss function, but to a much broader class of loss functions.