Limits of Machine Learning
•Descargar como ODP, PDF•
0 recomendaciones•141 vistas
An overview of what can and can not be done, a guide for selecting which problems are more suitable for ML and describing some pitfalls.
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
Similar a Limits of Machine Learning
Similar a Limits of Machine Learning (20)
Último
Último (20)
Limits of Machine Learning
- 1. Limits of Machine Learning P i c k i n g p r o b l e m s t o s o l v e w i t h M L M E I R M A O R C h i e f A r c h i t e c t @ S p a r k B e y o n d
- 2. About Me Meir Maor Chief Architect @ SparkBeyond At SparkBeyond we leverage the collective human knowledge to solve the world's toughest problems
- 3. AI the current frontier What can and can not be done with Machine Learning Practical advice for setting up Machine Learning Problems Feature Engineering Hyper Parameter tuning Model Selection Training Huge Neural Netwoks
- 4. AI is taking over the wold
- 5. Well, not quite, but ... With no knowledge but the rules and typical game length, Alpha Zero learned to play both Go and Chess at Super Human level
- 6. And more. Single Sentence translation Chinese<->English at human level ImageNet Image classification at super human ability Finding problems in Non-Disclousre-Agreements at human level Cancer early warning, Churn prediction, Ad optimization, Predictive maintenance, and many many more.
- 7. Predicting is Hard, Especially the Future - N.Bohr We use machine learning to: Predict outcome, unseen behavior, future events To automate human tasks, classify, label, prioritize
- 8. To Assume makes an Ass out of U and Me Common assumptions in Machine Learning: * Data comes from stationary distribution(train and test have same distribution) * Training samples are independent * Past actions were random, no hidden confounders
- 9. The unreasonable effectiveness of Data With plenty of data machine learning becomes easy The recent rise of Deep Learning, is not from algorithmic advancements but rather the existence of large data sets and computers which can process them With enough data you are essentially learning from examples almost identical to those you later need to predict/classify
- 10. The perfect fit I have tremendous computing power, let’s find a function which perfectly describes my data PAC model No Free Lunch Better generalization Leslie Valiant, 1984
- 11. Compromise Bias / Variance tradeoff → We must limit our search space Shrink the hypothesis space: limit boosting iterations tree size min sample in leaf number of hidden nodes impose sparsity constraint ...
- 12. Compromise cont. Penalize “less favourable” models: Lasso / ridge regularization Bagging / Boot strap sampling Drop out
- 13. Needle in a Hay Stack All the Hay in the world won’t teach you what a needle looks like It’s important to have enough samples of the rare class
- 14. What is normal? Unsupervised learning tries to find a needle using only hay. Abnormal Hay? - Extra long? - a piece of grain? - Too long in the sun? - Still green? - A Needle!
- 15. Transfer Learning Learning to solve a problem, and applying on a similar different problem Any time samples don’t come from exactly the same distribution: Learning from one area and applying on the next Learning from the past and applying on the future Learning from non random sample
- 16. Transfer Learning to the rescue We can and must learn from previous problems How can a child learn to identify a Ring Tailed Lemur from a single photo?
- 17. The computer isn’t there yet We can use pre-trained embeddings, and pre-trained networks but only for similar problems. Good results for text, some for images(similar domain), not so much beyond. Even with excellent help can’t learn a new animal from a single photo
- 18. What If? When we are wondering about future actions, and past actions were not random we are doing transfer learning.
- 19. Randomized Study Always preferable to train machine learning on data were actions were random
- 21. When was that? We want to learn only with what we will have. We must know what did we know back then?
- 22. Mining for Unobtainium* A client in the never never land want to find new Unobtainium deposits in the never-never lands. A large part of the the land has been explored and we have a map of the mines Many areas were not explored, we have no Map * Identifying client details were changed
- 23. Modelling Take 1 Place a grid on the never-never land map All grid square with a known deposit are positive Since Unobtainium is rare all others can be assumed to be negative Use advanced imaging, radiometric, magnetic, topographic maps, geological maps, and more for explaining variables.
- 24. 99% AUC!! We are going to be rich! Using topographic data, a big hole in the ground predicts a large deposit perfectly. We are detecting existing active mines. Back to the archives to find 50 year old maps from before most mines were open.
- 25. 96% AUC! We are going to be rich! Distance from roads, Is an excellent predictor. Not only do all existing mines have roads to them Past exploration was primarily in accessible areas Removing roads is not enough, They are hidden in all the data.
- 27. Observational study, Simpson’s Paradox
- 28. Obviously we should look at the break down Low Birth-Weight babies born to smoking mothers have lower mortality rates compared to similar weight babies from non smokers. Normal Birth Weight babies born to smoking mothers have lower mortality rates compared to similar weight babies from non smokers. Ergo. Smoking is good for your baby!
- 29. Summary Need Stationary distribution, need to predict on samples like those trained on Need Data, especially of rare events Need to be aware of changing world Measure&evaluate everything!
Notas del editor
- &lt;number&gt;
- Simple models which rely on a few well established concepts and yet don’t rely to heavly on any one source are more likely to represent the underlying distribution of the data. More then that, they seem to hold up better to some changes in that distribution. Models which are apriori more likely are more likely also on new distribution
- Simple models which rely on a few well established concepts and yet don’t rely to heavly on any one source are more likely to represent the underlying distribution of the data. More then that, they seem to hold up better to some changes in that distribution. Models which are apriori more likely are more likely also on new distribution
- Simple models which rely on a few well established concepts and yet don’t rely to heavly on any one source are more likely to represent the underlying distribution of the data. More then that, they seem to hold up better to some changes in that distribution. Models which are apriori more likely are more likely also on new distribution
- Simple models which rely on a few well established concepts and yet don’t rely to heavly on any one source are more likely to represent the underlying distribution of the data. More then that, they seem to hold up better to some changes in that distribution. Models which are apriori more likely are more likely also on new distribution
- Simple models which rely on a few well established concepts and yet don’t rely to heavly on any one source are more likely to represent the underlying distribution of the data. More then that, they seem to hold up better to some changes in that distribution. Models which are apriori more likely are more likely also on new distribution
- Simple models which rely on a few well established concepts and yet don’t rely to heavly on any one source are more likely to represent the underlying distribution of the data. More then that, they seem to hold up better to some changes in that distribution. Models which are apriori more likely are more likely also on new distribution
- background/foregroud, 3d object rotations, identifying limbs and their motion hidden parts,...