Learning power and language expressiveness

The topic of the present work is to study the relationship between the power of the learning algorithms on the one hand, and the expressive power of the logical language which is used to represent the problems to be learned on the other hand. The central question is whether enriching the language results in more learning power. In order to make the question relevant and nontrivial, it is required that both texts (sequences of data) and hypotheses (guesses) be translatable from the “rich” language into the “poor” one. The issue is considered for several logical languages suitable to describe structures whose domain is the set of natural numbers. It is shown that enriching the language does not give any advantage for those languages which define a monadic second-order language being decidable in the following sense: there is a fixed interpretation in the structure of natural numbers such that the set of sentences of this extended language true in that structure is decidable. But enriching the original language even by only one constant gives an advantage if this language contains a binary function symbol (which will be interpreted as addition). Furthermore, it is shown that behaviourally correct learning has exactly the same power as learning in the limit for those languages which define a monadic second-order language with the property given above, but has more power in case of languages containing a binary function symbol. Adding the natural requirement that the set of all structures to be learned is recursively enumerable, it is shown that it pays o6 to enrich the language of arithmetics for both finite learning and learning in the limit, but it does not pay off to enrich the language for behaviourally correct learning.

Automatic spoken language identification utilizing acoustic and phonetic speech information

Automatic spoken Language Identi¯cation (LID) is the process of identifying the language spoken within an utterance. The challenge that this task presents is that no prior information is available indicating the content of the utterance or the identity of the speaker. The trend of globalization and the pervasive popularity of the Internet will amplify the need for the capabilities spoken language identi¯ca- tion systems provide. A prominent application arises in call centers dealing with speakers speaking di®erent languages. Another important application is to index or search huge speech data archives and corpora that contain multiple languages. The aim of this research is to develop techniques targeted at producing a fast and more accurate automatic spoken LID system compared to the previous National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Language Recognition Evaluation. Acoustic and phonetic speech information are targeted as the most suitable fea- tures for representing the characteristics of a language. To model the acoustic speech features a Gaussian Mixture Model based approach is employed. Pho- netic speech information is extracted using existing speech recognition technol- ogy. Various techniques to improve LID accuracy are also studied. One approach examined is the employment of Vocal Tract Length Normalization to reduce the speech variation caused by di®erent speakers. A linear data fusion technique is adopted to combine the various aspects of information extracted from speech. As a result of this research, a LID system was implemented and presented for evaluation in the 2003 Language Recognition Evaluation conducted by the NIST.

The concept of vulnerability and the protection of human subjects of research

This article provides an overview of the concept of vulnerability through the lens of the U.S. federal regulations for the protection of human subjects of research. General issues that emerge for nurse researchers working with regulated vulnerable populations are identified. Points of current controversy in the application of the regulations and current discourse about vulnerable groups are highlighted. Suggestions for negotiating the tension between federally regulated human subject requirements and the realities of research with vulnerable subjects are given. The limitations of the designation of vulnerable as a protection for human subjects will also be discussed.