In theoretical linguistics and computational linguistics, probabilistic context free grammars (PCFGs) extend context-free grammars, similar to how hidden Markov models extend regular grammars. Each production is assigned a probability. The probability of a derivation (parse) is the product of the probabilities of the productions used in that derivation. These probabilities can be viewed as parameters of the model, and for large problems it is convenient to learn these parameters via machine learning. A probabilistic grammar's validity is constrained by context of its training dataset. PCFGs originated from grammar theory, and have application in areas as diverse as natural language processing to the study the structure of RNA molecules and design of programming languages. Designing efficient PCFGs has to weigh factors of scalability and generality. Issues such as grammar ambiguity must be resolved. The grammar design affects results accuracy. Grammar parsing algorithms have various time and memory requirements. == Definitions == Derivation: The process of recursive generation of strings from a grammar. Parsing: Finding a valid derivation using an automaton. Parse Tree: The alignment of the grammar to a sequence. An example of a parser for PCFG grammars is the pushdown automaton. The algorithm parses grammar nonterminals from left to right in a stack-like manner. This brute-force approach is not very efficient. In RNA secondary structure prediction variants of the Cocke–Younger–Kasami (CYK) algorithm provide more efficient alternatives to grammar parsing than pushdown automata. Another example of a PCFG parser is the Stanford Statistical Parser which has been trained using Treebank. == Formal definition == Similar to a CFG, a probabilistic context-free grammar G can be defined by a quintuple: G = ( M , T , R , S , P ) {\displaystyle G=(M,T,R,S,P)} where M is the set of non-terminal symbols T is the set of terminal symbols R is the set of production rules S is the start symbol P is the set of probabilities on production rules == Relation with hidden Markov models == PCFGs models extend context-free grammars the same way as hidden Markov models extend regular grammars. The Inside-Outside algorithm is an analogue of the Forward-Backward algorithm. It computes the total probability of all derivations that are consistent with a given sequence, based on some PCFG. This is equivalent to the probability of the PCFG generating the sequence, and is intuitively a measure of how consistent the sequence is with the given grammar. The Inside-Outside algorithm is used in model parametrization to estimate prior frequencies observed from training sequences in the case of RNAs. Dynamic programming variants of the CYK algorithm find the Viterbi parse of a RNA sequence for a PCFG model. This parse is the most likely derivation of the sequence by the given PCFG. == Grammar construction == Context-free grammars are represented as a set of rules inspired from attempts to model natural languages. The rules are absolute and have a typical syntax representation known as Backus–Naur form. The production rules consist of terminal { a , b } {\displaystyle \left\{a,b\right\}} and non-terminal S symbols and a blank ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } may also be used as an end point. In the production rules of CFG and PCFG the left side has only one nonterminal whereas the right side can be any string of terminal or nonterminals. In PCFG nulls are excluded. An example of a grammar: S → a S , S → b S , S → ϵ {\displaystyle S\to aS,S\to bS,S\to \epsilon } This grammar can be shortened using the '|' ('or') character into: S → a S | b S | ϵ {\displaystyle S\to aS|bS|\epsilon } Terminals in a grammar are words and through the grammar rules a non-terminal symbol is transformed into a string of either terminals and/or non-terminals. The above grammar is read as "beginning from a non-terminal S the emission can generate either a or b or ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } ". Its derivation is: S ⇒ a S ⇒ a b S ⇒ a b b S ⇒ a b b {\displaystyle S\Rightarrow aS\Rightarrow abS\Rightarrow abbS\Rightarrow abb} Ambiguous grammar may result in ambiguous parsing if applied on homographs since the same word sequence can have more than one interpretation. Pun sentences such as the newspaper headline "Iraqi Head Seeks Arms" are an example of ambiguous parses. One strategy of dealing with ambiguous parses (originating with grammarians as early as Pāṇini) is to add yet more rules, or prioritize them so that one rule takes precedence over others. This, however, has the drawback of proliferating the rules, often to the point where they become difficult to manage. Another difficulty is overgeneration, where unlicensed structures are also generated. Probabilistic grammars circumvent these problems by ranking various productions on frequency weights, resulting in a "most likely" (winner-take-all) interpretation. As usage patterns are altered in diachronic shifts, these probabilistic rules can be re-learned, thus updating the grammar. Assigning probability to production rules makes a PCFG. These probabilities are informed by observing distributions on a training set of similar composition to the language to be modeled. On most samples of broad language, probabilistic grammars where probabilities are estimated from data typically outperform hand-crafted grammars. CFGs when contrasted with PCFGs are not applicable to RNA structure prediction because while they incorporate sequence-structure relationship they lack the scoring metrics that reveal a sequence structural potential == Weighted context-free grammar == A weighted context-free grammar (WCFG) is a more general category of context-free grammar, where each production has a numeric weight associated with it. The weight of a specific parse tree in a WCFG is the product (or sum ) of all rule weights in the tree. Each rule weight is included as often as the rule is used in the tree. A special case of WCFGs are PCFGs, where the weights are (logarithms of ) probabilities. An extended version of the CYK algorithm can be used to find the "lightest" (least-weight) derivation of a string given some WCFG. When the tree weight is the product of the rule weights, WCFGs and PCFGs can express the same set of probability distributions. == Applications == === RNA structure prediction === Since the 1990s, PCFG has been applied to model RNA structures. Energy minimization and PCFG provide ways of predicting RNA secondary structure with comparable performance. However structure prediction by PCFGs is scored probabilistically rather than by minimum free energy calculation. PCFG model parameters are directly derived from frequencies of different features observed in databases of RNA structures rather than by experimental determination as is the case with energy minimization methods. The types of various structure that can be modeled by a PCFG include long range interactions, pairwise structure and other nested structures. However, pseudoknots can not be modeled. PCFGs extend CFG by assigning probabilities to each production rule. A maximum probability parse tree from the grammar implies a maximum probability structure. Since RNAs preserve their structures over their primary sequence, RNA structure prediction can be guided by combining evolutionary information from comparative sequence analysis with biophysical knowledge about a structure plausibility based on such probabilities. Also search results for structural homologs using PCFG rules are scored according to PCFG derivations probabilities. Therefore, building grammar to model the behavior of base-pairs and single-stranded regions starts with exploring features of structural multiple sequence alignment of related RNAs. S → a S a | b S b | a a | b b {\displaystyle S\to aSa|bSb|aa|bb} The above grammar generates a string in an outside-in fashion, that is the basepair on the furthest extremes of the terminal is derived first. So a string such as a a b a a b a a {\displaystyle aabaabaa} is derived by first generating the distal a's on both sides before moving inwards: S ⇒ a S a ⇒ a a S a a ⇒ a a b S b a a ⇒ a a b a a b a a {\displaystyle S\Rightarrow aSa\Rightarrow aaSaa\Rightarrow aabSbaa\Rightarrow aabaabaa} A PCFG model extendibility allows constraining structure prediction by incorporating expectations about different features of an RNA . Such expectation may reflect for example the propensity for assuming a certain structure by an RNA. However incorporation of too much information may increase PCFG space and memory complexity and it is desirable that a PCFG-based model be as simple as possible. Every possible string x a grammar generates is assigned a probability weight P ( x | θ ) {\displaystyle P(x|\theta )} given the PCFG model θ {\displaystyle \theta } . It follows that the sum of all probabilities to all possible grammar productions is ∑ x P ( x | θ ) = 1 {\displaystyle \sum _{\text{x}}P(x|\theta )=1} . The scores
Cloud Security Alliance
Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) is a not-for-profit organization with the mission to "promote the use of best practices for providing security assurance within cloud computing, artificial intelligence and to provide education on the uses of cloud computing to help secure all other forms of computing." The CSA has over 80,000 individual members worldwide. The CSA gained significant reputability in 2011 when the American Presidential Administration selected the CSA Summit as the venue for announcing the federal government’s cloud computing strategy. == History == The CSA was formed in December 2008 as a coalition by individuals who saw the need to provide objective enterprise user guidance on the adoption and use of cloud computing. Its initial work product, Security Guidance for Critical Areas of Focus in Cloud Computing, was put together in a Wiki-style by dozens of volunteers. In 2014, the Chairman of the Board of the CSA was Dave Cullinane, VP of Global Security and Privacy for Catalina Marketing, St. Petersburg, Florida, and former CISO for eBay. Cullinane has said, "If you have an application exposed to the Internet that will allow people to make money, it will be probed." == Profile == In 2009, the Cloud Security Alliance incorporated in Nevada as a Corporation and achieved US Federal 501(c)6 non-profit status. It is registered as a Foreign Non-Profit Corporation in Washington. == Policy maker support == The CSA works to support a number of global policy makers in their focus on cloud security initiatives including the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), European Commission, Singapore Government, and other data protection authorities. In March 2012, the CSA was selected to partner with three of Europe’s largest research centers (CERN, EMBL and ESA) to launch Helix Nebula – The Science Cloud. == Size == The Cloud Security Alliance employs roughly sixty full-time and contract staff worldwide. It has several thousand active volunteers participating in research, working groups and chapters at any time. == Membership == According to CSA, they are a member-driven organization, chartered with promoting the use of best practices for providing security assurance within Cloud Computing, and providing education on the uses of Cloud Computing to help secure all other forms of computing. === Individuals === Individuals who are interested in cloud computing and have experience to assist in making it more secure receive a complimentary individual membership based on a minimum level of participation. === Chapters === The Cloud Security Alliance has a network of chapters worldwide. Chapters are separate legal entities from the Cloud Security Alliance, but operate within guidelines set down by the Cloud Security Alliance In the United States, Chapters may elect to benefit from the non-profit tax shield that the Cloud Security Alliance has. Chapters are encouraged to hold local meetings and participate in areas of research. Chapter activities are coordinated by the Cloud Security Alliance worldwide. === International scope === There are separate legal entities in Europe and Asia Pacific, called Cloud Security Alliance (Europe), a Scottish company in the United Kingdom, and Cloud Security Alliance Asia Pacific Ltd, in Singapore. Each legal entity is responsible for overseeing all Cloud Security Alliance-related activities in their respective regions. These legal entities operate under an agreement with Cloud Security Alliance that give it oversight power and have separate Boards of Directors. Both are companies Limited By Guarantee. The Managing Directors of each are members of the Executive Team of Cloud Security Alliance. == Areas of research == The Cloud Security Alliance has 25+ active working groups. Key areas of research include cloud standards, certification, education and training, guidance and tools, global reach, and driving innovation. Security Guidance for Critical Areas of Focus in Cloud Computing. Foundational best practices for securing cloud computing. Top Threats to Cloud Computing. Helps organizations make educated risk management decisions regarding their cloud adoption strategies. GRC (Governance, Risk and Compliance) Stack. A toolkit for key stakeholders to instrument and assess clouds against industry established best practices, standards and critical compliance requirements. Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM). Security controls framework for cloud provider and cloud consumers. CloudTrust Protocol. The mechanism by which cloud service consumers ask for and receive information about the elements of transparency as applied to cloud service providers. Consensus Assessments Initiative Research. Tools and processes to perform consistent measurements of cloud providers. Software Defined Perimeter. A proposed security framework that can be deployed to protect application infrastructure from network-based attacks. It will incorporate standards from organizations such as OASIS and NIST and security concepts from organizations like the U.S. DoD into an integrated framework. == Working groups and initiatives == Mobile Working Group Big Data Working Group Security as a Service Working Group Trusted Cloud Initiative CloudAudit CloudCERT CloudSIRT Cloud Metrics Security, Trust and Assurance Registry (STAR) Cloud Data Governance Turbot (business) Blockchain/Distributed Ledger
Types of artificial neural networks
Types of neural networks (NN) include a family of techniques. The simplest types have static components, including number of units, number of layers, unit weights and topology. Dynamic NNs evolve via learning. Some types allow/require learning to be "supervised" by the operator, while others operate independently. Some types operate purely in hardware, while others are purely software and run on general purpose computers. The main types are: Transformers: these use attention to analyze every token in the input stream against every other token in the stream. That technique has enabled neural networks to reach the general public via chatbots, code generators and many other forms. Convolutional neural networks (CNN): a FNN that uses kernels and regularization to evade problems in prior generations of NNs. They are typically used to analyze visual and other two-dimensional data. Generative adversarial networks set networks (of varying structure) against each other, each trying to push the other(s) to produce better results such as winning a game or to deceive the opponent about the authenticity of an input. == Feedforward == In feedforward neural networks the information moves from the input to output directly in every layer. There can be hidden layers with or without cycles/loops to sequence inputs. Feedforward networks can be constructed with various types of units, such as binary McCulloch–Pitts neurons, the simplest of which is the perceptron. Continuous neurons, frequently with sigmoidal activation, are used in the context of backpropagation. == Group method of data handling == The Group Method of Data Handling (GMDH) features fully automatic structural and parametric model optimization. The node activation functions are Kolmogorov–Gabor polynomials that permit additions and multiplications. It uses a deep multilayer perceptron with eight layers. It is a supervised learning network that grows layer by layer, where each layer is trained by regression analysis. Useless items are detected using a validation set, and pruned through regularization. The size and depth of the resulting network depends on the task. == Autoencoder == An autoencoder, autoassociator or Diabolo network is similar to the multilayer perceptron (MLP) – with an input layer, an output layer and one or more hidden layers connecting them. However, the output layer has the same number of units as the input layer. Its purpose is to reconstruct its own inputs (instead of emitting a target value). Therefore, autoencoders are unsupervised learning models. An autoencoder is used for unsupervised learning of efficient codings, typically for the purpose of dimensionality reduction and for learning generative models of data. == Probabilistic == A probabilistic neural network (PNN) is a four-layer feedforward neural network. The layers are Input, hidden pattern, hidden summation, and output. In the PNN algorithm, the parent probability distribution function (PDF) of each class is approximated by a Parzen window and a non-parametric function. Then, using PDF of each class, the class probability of a new input is estimated and Bayes’ rule is employed to allocate it to the class with the highest posterior probability. It was derived from the Bayesian network and a statistical algorithm called Kernel Fisher discriminant analysis. It is used for classification and pattern recognition. == Time delay == A time delay neural network (TDNN) is a feedforward architecture for sequential data that recognizes features independent of sequence position. In order to achieve time-shift invariance, delays are added to the input so that multiple data points (points in time) are analyzed together. It usually forms part of a larger pattern recognition system. It has been implemented using a perceptron network whose connection weights were trained with back propagation (supervised learning). == Convolutional == A convolutional neural network (CNN, or ConvNet or shift invariant or space invariant) is a class of deep network, composed of one or more convolutional layers with fully connected layers (matching those in typical ANNs) on top. It uses tied weights and pooling layers. In particular, max-pooling. It is often structured via Fukushima's convolutional architecture. They are variations of multilayer perceptrons that use minimal preprocessing. This architecture allows CNNs to take advantage of the 2D structure of input data. Its unit connectivity pattern is inspired by the organization of the visual cortex. Units respond to stimuli in a restricted region of space known as the receptive field. Receptive fields partially overlap, over-covering the entire visual field. Unit response can be approximated mathematically by a convolution operation. CNNs are suitable for processing visual and other two-dimensional data. They have shown superior results in both image and speech applications. They can be trained with standard backpropagation. CNNs are easier to train than other regular, deep, feed-forward neural networks and have many fewer parameters to estimate. Capsule Neural Networks (CapsNet) add structures called capsules to a CNN and reuse output from several capsules to form more stable (with respect to various perturbations) representations. Examples of applications in computer vision include DeepDream and robot navigation. They have wide applications in image and video recognition, recommender systems and natural language processing. == Deep stacking network == A deep stacking network (DSN) (deep convex network) is based on a hierarchy of blocks of simplified neural network modules. It was introduced in 2011 by Deng and Yu. It formulates the learning as a convex optimization problem with a closed-form solution, emphasizing the mechanism's similarity to stacked generalization. Each DSN block is a simple module that is easy to train by itself in a supervised fashion without backpropagation for the entire blocks. Each block consists of a simplified multi-layer perceptron (MLP) with a single hidden layer. The hidden layer h has logistic sigmoidal units, and the output layer has linear units. Connections between these layers are represented by weight matrix U; input-to-hidden-layer connections have weight matrix W. Target vectors t form the columns of matrix T, and the input data vectors x form the columns of matrix X. The matrix of hidden units is H = σ ( W T X ) {\displaystyle {\boldsymbol {H}}=\sigma ({\boldsymbol {W}}^{T}{\boldsymbol {X}})} . Modules are trained in order, so lower-layer weights W are known at each stage. The function performs the element-wise logistic sigmoid operation. Each block estimates the same final label class y, and its estimate is concatenated with original input X to form the expanded input for the next block. Thus, the input to the first block contains the original data only, while downstream blocks' input adds the output of preceding blocks. Then learning the upper-layer weight matrix U given other weights in the network can be formulated as a convex optimization problem: min U T f = ‖ U T H − T ‖ F 2 , {\displaystyle \min _{U^{T}}f=\|{\boldsymbol {U}}^{T}{\boldsymbol {H}}-{\boldsymbol {T}}\|_{F}^{2},} which has a closed-form solution. Unlike other deep architectures, such as DBNs, the goal is not to discover the transformed feature representation. The structure of the hierarchy of this kind of architecture makes parallel learning straightforward, as a batch-mode optimization problem. In purely discriminative tasks, DSNs outperform conventional DBNs. === Tensor deep stacking networks === This architecture is a DSN extension. It offers two important improvements: it uses higher-order information from covariance statistics, and it transforms the non-convex problem of a lower-layer to a convex sub-problem of an upper-layer. TDSNs use covariance statistics in a bilinear mapping from each of two distinct sets of hidden units in the same layer to predictions, via a third-order tensor. While parallelization and scalability are not considered seriously in conventional DNNs, all learning for DSNs and TDSNs is done in batch mode, to allow parallelization. Parallelization allows scaling the design to larger (deeper) architectures and data sets. The basic architecture is suitable for diverse tasks such as classification and regression. == Physics-informed == Such a neural network is designed for the numerical solution of mathematical equations, such as differential, integral, delay, fractional and others. As input parameters, PINN accepts variables (spatial, temporal, and others), transmits them through the network block. At the output, it produces an approximate solution and substitutes it into the mathematical model, considering the initial and boundary conditions. If the solution does not satisfy the required accuracy, one uses the backpropagation and rectify the solution. Besides PINN, other architectures have been developed to produce surrogate models for scientific comput
Fitness function
A fitness function is a particular type of objective or cost function that is used to summarize, as a single figure of merit, how close a given candidate solution is to achieving the set aims. It is an important component of evolutionary algorithms (EA), such as genetic programming, evolution strategies or genetic algorithms. An EA is a metaheuristic that reproduces the basic principles of biological evolution as a computer algorithm in order to solve challenging optimization or planning tasks, at least approximately. For this purpose, many candidate solutions are generated, which are evaluated using a fitness function in order to guide the evolutionary development towards the desired goal. Similar quality functions are also used in other metaheuristics, such as ant colony optimization or particle swarm optimization. In the field of EAs, each candidate solution, also called an individual, is commonly represented as a string of numbers (referred to as a chromosome). After each round of testing or simulation the idea is to delete the n worst individuals, and to breed n new ones from the best solutions. Each individual must therefore to be assigned a quality number indicating how close it has come to the overall specification, and this is generated by applying the fitness function to the test or simulation results obtained from that candidate solution. Two main classes of fitness functions exist: one where the fitness function does not change, as in optimizing a fixed function or testing with a fixed set of test cases; and one where the fitness function is mutable, as in niche differentiation or co-evolving the set of test cases. Another way of looking at fitness functions is in terms of a fitness landscape, which shows the fitness for each possible chromosome. In the following, it is assumed that the fitness is determined based on an evaluation that remains unchanged during an optimization run. A fitness function does not necessarily have to be able to calculate an absolute value, as it is sometimes sufficient to compare candidates in order to select the better one. A relative indication of fitness (candidate a is better than b) is sufficient in some cases, such as tournament selection or Pareto optimization. == Requirements of evaluation and fitness function == The quality of the evaluation and calculation of a fitness function is fundamental to the success of an EA optimisation. It implements Darwin's principle of "survival of the fittest". Without fitness-based selection mechanisms for mate selection and offspring acceptance, EA search would be blind and hardly distinguishable from the Monte Carlo method. When setting up a fitness function, one must always be aware that it is about more than just describing the desired target state. Rather, the evolutionary search on the way to the optimum should also be supported as much as possible (see also section on auxiliary objectives), if and insofar as this is not already done by the fitness function alone. If the fitness function is designed badly, the algorithm will either converge on an inappropriate solution, or will have difficulty converging at all. Definition of the fitness function is not straightforward in many cases and often is performed iteratively if the fittest solutions produced by an EA is not what is desired. Interactive genetic algorithms address this difficulty by outsourcing evaluation to external agents which are normally humans. == Computational efficiency == The fitness function should not only closely align with the designer's goal, but also be computationally efficient. Execution speed is crucial, as a typical evolutionary algorithm must be iterated many times in order to produce a usable result for a non-trivial problem. Fitness approximation may be appropriate, especially in the following cases: Fitness computation time of a single solution is extremely high Precise model for fitness computation is missing The fitness function is uncertain or noisy. Alternatively or also in addition to the fitness approximation, the fitness calculations can also be distributed to a parallel computer in order to reduce the execution times. Depending on the population model of the EA used, both the EA itself and the fitness calculations of all offspring of one generation can be executed in parallel. == Multi-objective optimization == Practical applications usually aim at optimizing multiple and at least partially conflicting objectives. Two fundamentally different approaches are often used for this purpose, Pareto optimization and optimization based on fitness calculated using the weighted sum. === Weighted sum and penalty functions === When optimizing with the weighted sum, the single values of the O {\displaystyle O} objectives are first normalized so that they can be compared. This can be done with the help of costs or by specifying target values and determining the current value as the degree of fulfillment. Costs or degrees of fulfillment can then be compared with each other and, if required, can also be mapped to a uniform fitness scale. Without loss of generality, fitness is assumed to represent a value to be maximized. Each objective o i {\displaystyle o_{i}} is assigned a weight w i {\displaystyle w_{i}} in the form of a percentage value so that the overall raw fitness f r a w {\displaystyle f_{raw}} can be calculated as a weighted sum: f r a w = ∑ i = 1 O o i ⋅ w i w i t h ∑ i = 1 O w i = 1 {\displaystyle f_{raw}=\sum _{i=1}^{O}{o_{i}\cdot w_{i}}\quad {\mathsf {with}}\quad \sum _{i=1}^{O}{w_{i}}=1} A violation of R {\displaystyle R} restrictions r j {\displaystyle r_{j}} can be included in the fitness determined in this way in the form of penalty functions. For this purpose, a function p f j ( r j ) {\displaystyle pf_{j}(r_{j})} can be defined for each restriction which returns a value between 0 {\displaystyle 0} and 1 {\displaystyle 1} depending on the degree of violation, with the result being 1 {\displaystyle 1} if there is no violation. The previously determined raw fitness is multiplied by the penalty function(s) and the result is then the final fitness f f i n a l {\displaystyle f_{final}} : f f i n a l = f r a w ⋅ ∏ j = 1 R p f j ( r j ) = ∑ i = 1 O ( o i ⋅ w i ) ⋅ ∏ j = 1 R p f j ( r j ) {\displaystyle f_{final}=f_{raw}\cdot \prod _{j=1}^{R}{pf_{j}(r_{j})}=\sum _{i=1}^{O}{(o_{i}\cdot w_{i})}\cdot \prod _{j=1}^{R}{pf_{j}(r_{j})}} This approach is simple and has the advantage of being able to combine any number of objectives and restrictions. The disadvantage is that different objectives can compensate each other and that the weights have to be defined before the optimization. This means that the compromise lines must be defined before optimization, which is why optimization with the weighted sum is also referred to as the a priori method. In addition, certain solutions may not be obtained, see the section on the comparison of both types of optimization. === Pareto optimization === A solution is called Pareto-optimal if the improvement of one objective is only possible with a deterioration of at least one other objective. The set of all Pareto-optimal solutions, also called Pareto set, represents the set of all optimal compromises between the objectives. The figure below on the right shows an example of the Pareto set of two objectives f 1 {\displaystyle f_{1}} and f 2 {\displaystyle f_{2}} to be maximized. The elements of the set form the Pareto front (green line). From this set, a human decision maker must subsequently select the desired compromise solution. Constraints are included in Pareto optimization in that solutions without constraint violations are per se better than those with violations. If two solutions to be compared each have constraint violations, the respective extent of the violations decides. It was recognized early on that EAs with their simultaneously considered solution set are well suited to finding solutions in one run that cover the Pareto front sufficiently well. They are therefore well suited as a-posteriori methods for multi-objective optimization, in which the final decision is made by a human decision maker after optimization and determination of the Pareto front. Besides the SPEA2, the NSGA-II and NSGA-III have established themselves as standard methods. The advantage of Pareto optimization is that, in contrast to the weighted sum, it provides all alternatives that are equivalent in terms of the objectives as an overall solution. The disadvantage is that a visualization of the alternatives becomes problematic or even impossible from four objectives on. Furthermore, the effort increases exponentially with the number of objectives. If there are more than three or four objectives, some have to be combined using the weighted sum or other aggregation methods. === Comparison of both types of assessment === With the help of the weighted sum, the total Pareto front can be obtained by a suitable choice of weights, provided that it is convex
Variational message passing
Variational message passing (VMP) is an approximate inference technique for continuous- or discrete-valued Bayesian networks, with conjugate-exponential parents, developed by John Winn. VMP was developed as a means of generalizing the approximate variational methods used by such techniques as latent Dirichlet allocation, and works by updating an approximate distribution at each node through messages in the node's Markov blanket. == Likelihood lower bound == Given some set of hidden variables H {\displaystyle H} and observed variables V {\displaystyle V} , the goal of approximate inference is to maximize a lower-bound on the probability that a graphical model is in the configuration V {\displaystyle V} . Over some probability distribution Q {\displaystyle Q} (to be defined later), ln P ( V ) = ∑ H Q ( H ) ln P ( H , V ) P ( H | V ) = ∑ H Q ( H ) [ ln P ( H , V ) Q ( H ) − ln P ( H | V ) Q ( H ) ] {\displaystyle \ln P(V)=\sum _{H}Q(H)\ln {\frac {P(H,V)}{P(H|V)}}=\sum _{H}Q(H){\Bigg [}\ln {\frac {P(H,V)}{Q(H)}}-\ln {\frac {P(H|V)}{Q(H)}}{\Bigg ]}} . So, if we define our lower bound to be L ( Q ) = ∑ H Q ( H ) ln P ( H , V ) Q ( H ) {\displaystyle L(Q)=\sum _{H}Q(H)\ln {\frac {P(H,V)}{Q(H)}}} , then the likelihood is simply this bound plus the relative entropy between P {\displaystyle P} and Q {\displaystyle Q} . Because the relative entropy is non-negative, the function L {\displaystyle L} defined above is indeed a lower bound of the log likelihood of our observation V {\displaystyle V} . The distribution Q {\displaystyle Q} will have a simpler character than that of P {\displaystyle P} because marginalizing over P {\displaystyle P} is intractable for all but the simplest of graphical models. In particular, VMP uses a factorized distribution Q ( H ) = ∏ i Q i ( H i ) , {\displaystyle Q(H)=\prod _{i}Q_{i}(H_{i}),} where H i {\displaystyle H_{i}} is a disjoint part of the graphical model. == Determining the update rule == The likelihood estimate needs to be as large as possible; because it's a lower bound, getting closer log P {\displaystyle \log P} improves the approximation of the log likelihood. By substituting in the factorized version of Q {\displaystyle Q} , L ( Q ) {\displaystyle L(Q)} , parameterized over the hidden nodes H i {\displaystyle H_{i}} as above, is simply the negative relative entropy between Q j {\displaystyle Q_{j}} and Q j ∗ {\displaystyle Q_{j}^{}} plus other terms independent of Q j {\displaystyle Q_{j}} if Q j ∗ {\displaystyle Q_{j}^{}} is defined as Q j ∗ ( H j ) = 1 Z e E − j { ln P ( H , V ) } {\displaystyle Q_{j}^{}(H_{j})={\frac {1}{Z}}e^{\mathbb {E} _{-j}\{\ln P(H,V)\}}} , where E − j { ln P ( H , V ) } {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} _{-j}\{\ln P(H,V)\}} is the expectation over all distributions Q i {\displaystyle Q_{i}} except Q j {\displaystyle Q_{j}} . Thus, if we set Q j {\displaystyle Q_{j}} to be Q j ∗ {\displaystyle Q_{j}^{}} , the bound L {\displaystyle L} is maximized. == Messages in variational message passing == Parents send their children the expectation of their sufficient statistic while children send their parents their natural parameter, which also requires messages to be sent from the co-parents of the node. == Relationship to exponential families == Because all nodes in VMP come from exponential families and all parents of nodes are conjugate to their children nodes, the expectation of the sufficient statistic can be computed from the normalization factor. == VMP algorithm == The algorithm begins by computing the expected value of the sufficient statistics for that vector. Then, until the likelihood converges to a stable value (this is usually accomplished by setting a small threshold value and running the algorithm until it increases by less than that threshold value), do the following at each node: Get all messages from parents. Get all messages from children (this might require the children to get messages from the co-parents). Compute the expected value of the nodes sufficient statistics. == Constraints == Because every child must be conjugate to its parent, this has limited the types of distributions that can be used in the model. For example, the parents of a Gaussian distribution must be a Gaussian distribution (corresponding to the Mean) and a gamma distribution (corresponding to the precision, or one over σ {\displaystyle \sigma } in more common parameterizations). Discrete variables can have Dirichlet parents, and Poisson and exponential nodes must have gamma parents. More recently, VMP has been extended to handle models that violate this conditional conjugacy constraint. == Literature == John Winn; Christopher M. Bishop (2005). "Variational Message Passing" (PDF). Journal of Machine Learning Research. 6: 661–694. ISSN 1533-7928. Wikidata Q139488859. Beal, M.J. (2003). Variational Algorithms for Approximate Bayesian Inference (PDF) (PhD). Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit, University College London. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2005-04-28. Retrieved 2007-02-15.
Database-as-IPC
In computer programming, Database-as-IPC may be considered an anti-pattern where a disk persisted table in a database is used as the message queue store for routine inter-process communication (IPC) or subscribed data processing. If database performance is of concern, alternatives include sockets, network socket, or message queue. British computer scientist, Junade Ali, defined the Database-as-IPC Anti-Pattern as using a database to "schedule jobs or queue up tasks to be completed", noting that this anti-pattern centres around using a database for temporary messages instead of persistent data. == Controversy == The issue arises if there is a performance issue, and if additional systems (and servers) can be justified. In terms of performance, recent advancements in database systems provide more efficient mechanisms for signaling and messaging, and database systems also support memory (non-persisted) tables. There are databases with built-in notification mechanisms, such as PostgreSQL, SQL Server, and Oracle. These mechanisms and future improvements of database systems can make queuing much more efficient and avoid the need to set up a separate signaling or messaging queue system along with the server and management overhead. While MySQL doesn't have direct support for notifications, some workarounds are possible. However, they would be seen as non-standard and therefore more difficult to maintain.
Quadratic classifier
In statistics, a quadratic classifier is a statistical classifier that uses a quadratic decision surface to separate measurements of two or more classes of objects or events. It is a more general version of the linear classifier. == The classification problem == Statistical classification considers a set of vectors of observations x of an object or event, each of which has a known type y. This set is referred to as the training set. The problem is then to determine, for a given new observation vector, what the best class should be. For a quadratic classifier, the correct solution is assumed to be quadratic in the measurements, so y will be decided based on x T A x + b T x + c {\displaystyle \mathbf {x^{T}Ax} +\mathbf {b^{T}x} +c} In the special case where each observation consists of two measurements, this means that the surfaces separating the classes will be conic sections (i.e., either a line, a circle or ellipse, a parabola or a hyperbola). In this sense, we can state that a quadratic model is a generalization of the linear model, and its use is justified by the desire to extend the classifier's ability to represent more complex separating surfaces. == Quadratic discriminant analysis == Quadratic discriminant analysis (QDA) is closely related to linear discriminant analysis (LDA), where it is assumed that the measurements from each class are normally distributed. Unlike LDA however, in QDA there is no assumption that the covariance of each of the classes is identical. When the normality assumption is true, the best possible test for the hypothesis that a given measurement is from a given class is the likelihood ratio test. Suppose there are only two groups, with means μ 0 , μ 1 {\displaystyle \mu _{0},\mu _{1}} and covariance matrices Σ 0 , Σ 1 {\displaystyle \Sigma _{0},\Sigma _{1}} corresponding to y = 0 {\displaystyle y=0} and y = 1 {\displaystyle y=1} respectively. Then the likelihood ratio is given by Likelihood ratio = | 2 π Σ 1 | − 1 exp ( − 1 2 ( x − μ 1 ) T Σ 1 − 1 ( x − μ 1 ) ) | 2 π Σ 0 | − 1 exp ( − 1 2 ( x − μ 0 ) T Σ 0 − 1 ( x − μ 0 ) ) < t {\displaystyle {\text{Likelihood ratio}}={\frac {{\sqrt {|2\pi \Sigma _{1}|}}^{-1}\exp \left(-{\frac {1}{2}}(\mathbf {x} -{\boldsymbol {\mu }}_{1})^{T}\Sigma _{1}^{-1}(\mathbf {x} -{\boldsymbol {\mu }}_{1})\right)}{{\sqrt {|2\pi \Sigma _{0}|}}^{-1}\exp \left(-{\frac {1}{2}}(\mathbf {x} -{\boldsymbol {\mu }}_{0})^{T}\Sigma _{0}^{-1}(\mathbf {x} -{\boldsymbol {\mu }}_{0})\right)}}