The 14th season of the Top Chess Engine Championship took place between 17 November 2018 and 24 February 2019. Stockfish was the defending champion, having defeated Komodo in the previous season's superfinal. The season is notable for two things: the emergence of two strong, new engines, the Komodo variant Komodo Monte Carlo tree search (MCTS) and the neural network engine Leela Chess Zero, and the dramatic superfinal. Komodo MCTS and Leela fought their way from Division 4 and Division 3 respectively to the Premier Division, with Leela further qualifying for the superfinal against Stockfish. The superfinal was a topsy-turvy affair with the lead changing hands several times. It finished as the closest superfinal TCEC has ever seen, with Stockfish winning by a single game, 50.5–49.5 (+10 =81 -9). == Overview == === Structure === The season comprised five divisions: from the lowest Division 4 to the Premier Division. The top two engines of each division promote to the division above, while the bottom two engines relegate. The top two engines of the Premier Division contest a 100-game superfinal. The lengths of the opening books used increases as the divisions progress. The superfinal itself used a custom opening book designed by Jeroen Noomen. === Rules === The TCEC draw and win rules were slightly modified for Season 14. The game is now adjudicated as drawn if, after move 30, both engines have evals ±0.08 for five consecutive moves, and there are neither pawn moves nor a capture. Win adjudication now occurs if both engines have an eval of ±10 for five consecutive moves. Following the controversy over DeusX's participation last season, the uniqueness rule for neural networks was modified such that at least two of the following three hallmarks must be unique: The code for training the neural network The neural network (and weights file) itself The engine that executes this network This change meant DeusX did not meet the uniqueness criteria and therefore did not participate. Aside from this change, the season used the standard rules of the TCEC. == Results == === Division 4 === New entrant Komodo MCTS dominated Division 4, winning by a clear four points, although it did lose a game to second-place finisher rofChade. Fellow new entrant Scorpio NN performed badly and finished last, drawing only one game and losing the rest. === Division 3 === The neural network engine Leela Chess Zero had just missed promotion to Division 2 in the previous season. Since its relatively weak performance last season was partly due to hardware problems, and since it had shown a lot of improvement in strength, it was the hot favourite in this division. Leela lived up to its billing by comprehensively defeating everyone else. In a portent of future divisions however, Leela surprisingly dropped a game to third-place Arasan. Komodo MCTS was also improving quickly, and an updated version finished second behind Leela. The gap between second and third was 6.5 points, illustrating the gulf in class. === Division 2 === Although Division 2 engines are significantly stronger than Division 3, Leela and Komodo MCTS continued to dominate the competition, and again finished first and second. Komodo MCTS only lost one game to Leela, while Leela's tendency to occasionally lose to weaker engines saw her losing a game to 4th-placed Booot. Third place finisher Xiphos gave Leela and Komodo MCTS a run for their money, and was in the running up until the final rounds when it lost a crucial game to Leela. This loss left it one point behind Komodo MCTS in the final standings. === Division 1 === Leela and Komodo MCTS's rampage through the lower divisions continued, and they again finished first and second. In a demonstration of how much it had improved, Leela scored 20/28 in this division, the same score it had achieved in Division 2. This was also a TCEC points record for this division. However, Leela dropped a game against fourth-place finisher Chiron. Komodo MCTS, which had yet to lose a game in the lower divisions except to Leela, also conceded its first loss to third-place Fizbo. At the other end of the table, former champions Jonny and Fritz, which had not been updated, found themselves outclassed and finished second-last and last respectively; however with fellow competitor Ginkgo crashing five times (and therefore being disqualified), Jonny managed to stay in the division. The penultimate game for this division set a new TCEC moves record for a decisive game: 308 moves before Leela defeated Fritz. === Premier division === This was the strongest premier division ever, with multiple-time champions Stockfish, Komodo, and Houdini in the mix. Right from the start it became clear that Stockfish was in a league of its own, and it dominated the division, scoring wins against every other engine without losing a game. Second place however was a hotly-contested affair, with Leela, Komodo and Houdini neck-and-neck for most of the division. Houdini took the early lead, but Komodo gained second after winning two games by forfeit when its sibling Komodo MCTS crashed. This led to murmurs of a "Konspiracy". However, when both Komodo and Houdini failed to score more wins against the lower half of the field, Leela was able to take the lead. Halfway through the division the race was upended again when Leela went through a bad streak, losing three games in a row to Stockfish, Komodo, and Fire. This led to Komodo regaining second place, only for Komodo MCTS to crash yet again. By TCEC rules this meant Komodo MCTS was disqualified and all its scores were zeroed out, which put Leela back in second place. With three games left, Leela missed a win against Andscacs, which would've more or less secured her a place in the superfinal. Meanwhile, Komodo kept the division interesting by winning two of its last three games. Because Komodo had superior tiebreakers to Leela, this meant Komodo would qualify for the superfinal unless Leela managed to hold Stockfish to a draw with Black in the last game of the division. In a tense final game, Stockfish came close to winning, but missed the winning line. Leela managed to draw and qualified for the superfinal. At the other end of the table, it was quickly apparent that Ethereal and Andscacs were the weakest engines and would likely relegate. However, when Komodo MCTS was disqualified (and therefore relegated), it threw both engines a lifeline, since they could now stay in the division by beating the other. Andscacs was able to score a head-to-head win against Ethereal, but was crushed by Stockfish (+0 =2 -4) and Leela (+0 =3 -3). Ethereal didn't manage to score a win in the entire division, but did manage to score more draws than Andscacs, condemning Andscacs to relegation. === Superfinal === Going into the superfinal expectations were high for Leela: she had received a new network and had just won her first major competition when she defeated Houdini in the second TCEC cup. However, she had won the tournament without having played Stockfish (who had been surprisingly eliminated by Houdini in the semifinals). That, plus the fact that Stockfish dominated Premier Division and had never lost a match to Leela, left it unclear which engine was superior, although most spectators favored Stockfish. The superfinal turned out to be a roller-coaster. It began with Stockfish drawing first blood in game 7, and then scoring another win in game 10. Leela hit back with wins in game 11 and 13, but then lost games 20, 21, and 22. This gave Stockfish a 3-point lead. However, in the next 30 games, Leela was the only one to score wins: it first equalized by winning games 25, 27, and 29, and then took the lead by winning games 49 and 53. Stockfish won game 56, but Leela won game 63, maintaining her lead. There followed two dramatic games. In game 65, Leela built up a winning position. Stockfish showed a +153 evaluation, indicating that it had found a forced line leading to an endgame tablebase win; indeed analysis with 7-piece tablebases showed that Leela's position was winning. Under previous seasons' rules, the game would have been adjudicated as a win because Leela's evaluation was above 6.5. However under the new rules, Leela's +8.92 evaluation was not enough to adjudicate. It turned out that Leela could not see the winning line, and shuffled her pieces aimlessly, leading to a 50-move draw. In game 66, Stockfish was given a substantial advantage by the opening, but failed to make the most of it. The evaluations were leveling out to zero when the internet connection to the GPU servers was cut off. By tournament rules, this meant the game was replayed from scratch. After a further internet disconnection and restart, Stockfish handled the opening better and won, leaving Leela with a 1-point lead. In the last third of the superfinal, there followed more drama as Leela often built up strong advantages, but Stockfish showed great resourcefulness in defending inferior positions. Meanwh
Direct voice input
Direct voice input (DVI), sometimes called voice input control (VIC), is a style of human–machine interaction "HMI" in which the user makes voice commands to issue instructions to the machine through speech recognition. In the field of military aviation, DVI has been introduced into the cockpits of several modern military aircraft, such as the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, the Dassault Rafale, the KF-21 Boramae and the Saab JAS 39 Gripen. Such systems have also been used for various other purposes, including industry control systems and speech recognition assistance for impaired individuals. == Overview == DVI systems can be divided into two major categories of functionality: "user-dependent" or "user-independent". A user-dependent system requires that a personal voice template to be generated for a specific person; the template for this individual has to be loaded onto their assigned machine prior to use of the DVI system for it to function properly. In contrast, a user-independent system does not require any personal voice template, being intended to respond correctly to the voice of any user. They can also be categorised between "discrete recognition" and "continuous recognition". Users of a discrete recognition system must pause between each word so that the DVI system can identify the separations between each word, while a continuous speech recognition system is capable of understanding a normal rate of speech. During the mid-2000s, researchers at the National Aerospace Laboratory in the Netherlands examined the use of DVI in the "GRACE" simulator; a total of twelve pilots participated in the ensuing experiment. The tests performed reportedly revealed that, while the hardware itself functioned well, several improvements were desirable prior to real-world deployment on aircraft since DVI operations actually consumed more time in comparison to traditional existing methods. Recommendations for improvements included the adoption of simpler syntax, the achievement of a greater recognition rate, and a decrease in response times; all of the issues encountered were determined to be of a technological nature, and were deemed feasible to resolve. The researchers concluded that in cockpits, especially during emergencies where pilots have to operate entirely on their own, a DVI system could be highly relevant, but that it was not of crucial importance during most other conceivable scenarios. Around the same time, evaluations of DVI systems for civil aviation purposes were conducted within the framework of Project SafeSound, coordinated by the European Union. It involved the observation of pilot workloads in real-world cockpits and contrasting them against pilot activity in flight simulators using both conventional systems and DVI assistance. The project aimed to enhance aviation safety and to decrease the workload in both ground and flight operations via the application of enhanced audio functions. == Applications == === Aviation === Prior to its widespread deployment, a handful of conventional military aircraft were converted to trial DVI systems; examples include the Harrier AV-8B and F-16 VISTA. In another case, a General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon simulator was modified with DVI for a voice control study that was undertaken by the Royal Netherlands Air Force. DVI trials have also been conducted on helicopters, including the Boeing AH-64 Apache, showing the potential to improve flight safety and mission effectiveness. Numerous modern fighter aircraft have been outfitted with DVI systems, often in combination with various other man-machine interface schemes, such as HOTAS-compliant controls and other advanced control technologies. The combination of Voice and HOTAS control schemes has sometimes been referred to as the "V-TAS" concept. A prominent fighter aircraft to be furnished with a V-TAS cockpit is the Eurofighter Typhoon. The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II also features a DVI system, which was developed by Adacel. Other examples includes the Dassault Rafale and the Saab JAS 39 Gripen. Numerous aircraft have been planned to use DVI. At one stage, the United States Air Force had sought to integrate DVI upon the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor; however, the technology was eventually judged to pose too many technical risks at that point in time, and thus such efforts were abandoned. === Personal === By 1990, working prototypes of speech recognition systems were being demonstrated; these were being promoted for the purpose of providing an effective man-machine interface for individuals with impaired speech. Techniques employed included time-encoded digital speech and automatic token set selection. Investigations of these early DVI systems reportedly included the use of automatic diagnostic routines and limited-scale trials using volunteers. During the 2010s, various companies were offering voice recognition systems to the general public in the form of personal digital assistants. One example is the Google Voice service, which allows users to pose questions via a DVI package installed on either a personal computer, tablet, or mobile phone. Numerous digital assistants have been developed, such as Amazon Echo, Siri, and Cortana, that use DVI to interact with users. === Commercial === DVI technology has enabled automated telephone systems to be widely deployed. Many companies commonly use centralised phone systems that route callers to the correct department via such methods. Various car manufacturers have also furnished their road vehicles with DVI systems; these typically allow drivers to control infotainment systems and interact with mobile phones with more convenience than legacy methods. During the late 1980s, investigations into the use of DVI systems for controlling CNC machines and other manufacturing apparatus were underway. During the 2010s, such systems were being used for logistics and warehouse management purposes.
The Best Free AI Code Generator for Beginners
In search of the best AI code generator? An AI code generator is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it turns a rough idea into a polished result in seconds. When choosing one, weigh output quality, pricing, export formats, and how well it fits the tools you already use. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI code generator slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.
Models of DNA evolution
A number of different Markov models of DNA sequence evolution have been proposed. These substitution models differ in terms of the parameters used to describe the rates at which one nucleotide replaces another during evolution. These models are frequently used in molecular phylogenetic analyses. In particular, they are used during the calculation of likelihood of a tree (in Bayesian and maximum likelihood approaches to tree estimation) and they are used to estimate the evolutionary distance between sequences from the observed differences between the sequences. == Introduction == These models are phenomenological descriptions of the evolution of DNA as a string of four discrete states. These Markov models do not explicitly depict the mechanism of mutation nor the action of natural selection. Rather they describe the relative rates of different changes. For example, mutational biases and purifying selection favoring conservative changes are probably both responsible for the relatively high rate of transitions compared to transversions in evolving sequences. However, the Kimura (K80) model described below only attempts to capture the effect of both forces in a parameter that reflects the relative rate of transitions to transversions. Evolutionary analyses of sequences are conducted on a wide variety of time scales. Thus, it is convenient to express these models in terms of the instantaneous rates of change between different states (the Q matrices below). If we are given a starting (ancestral) state at one position, the model's Q matrix and a branch length expressing the expected number of changes to have occurred since the ancestor, then we can derive the probability of the descendant sequence having each of the four states. The mathematical details of this transformation from rate-matrix to probability matrix are described in the mathematics of substitution models section of the substitution model page. By expressing models in terms of the instantaneous rates of change we can avoid estimating a large numbers of parameters for each branch on a phylogenetic tree (or each comparison if the analysis involves many pairwise sequence comparisons). The models described on this page describe the evolution of a single site within a set of sequences. They are often used for analyzing the evolution of an entire locus by making the simplifying assumption that different sites evolve independently and are identically distributed. This assumption may be justifiable if the sites can be assumed to be evolving neutrally. If the primary effect of natural selection on the evolution of the sequences is to constrain some sites, then models of among-site rate-heterogeneity can be used. This approach allows one to estimate only one matrix of relative rates of substitution, and another set of parameters describing the variance in the total rate of substitution across sites. == DNA evolution as a continuous-time Markov chain == === Continuous-time Markov chains === Continuous-time Markov chains have the usual transition matrices which are, in addition, parameterized by time, t {\displaystyle t} . Specifically, if E 1 , E 2 , E 3 , E 4 {\displaystyle E_{1},E_{2},E_{3},E_{4}} are the states, then the transition matrix P ( t ) = ( P i j ( t ) ) {\displaystyle P(t)={\big (}P_{ij}(t){\big )}} where each individual entry, P i j ( t ) {\displaystyle P_{ij}(t)} refers to the probability that state E i {\displaystyle E_{i}} will change to state E j {\displaystyle E_{j}} in time t {\displaystyle t} . Example: We would like to model the substitution process in DNA sequences (i.e. Jukes–Cantor, Kimura, etc.) in a continuous-time fashion. The corresponding transition matrices will look like: P ( t ) = ( p A A ( t ) p A G ( t ) p A C ( t ) p A T ( t ) p G A ( t ) p G G ( t ) p G C ( t ) p G T ( t ) p C A ( t ) p C G ( t ) p C C ( t ) p C T ( t ) p T A ( t ) p T G ( t ) p T C ( t ) p T T ( t ) ) {\displaystyle P(t)={\begin{pmatrix}p_{\mathrm {AA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {AG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {AC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {AT} }(t)\\p_{\mathrm {GA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {GG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {GC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {GT} }(t)\\p_{\mathrm {CA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {CG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {CC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {CT} }(t)\\p_{\mathrm {TA} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {TG} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {TC} }(t)&p_{\mathrm {TT} }(t)\end{pmatrix}}} where the top-left and bottom-right 2 × 2 blocks correspond to transition probabilities and the top-right and bottom-left 2 × 2 blocks corresponds to transversion probabilities. Assumption: If at some time t 0 {\displaystyle t_{0}} , the Markov chain is in state E i {\displaystyle E_{i}} , then the probability that at time t 0 + t {\displaystyle t_{0}+t} , it will be in state E j {\displaystyle E_{j}} depends only upon i {\displaystyle i} , j {\displaystyle j} and t {\displaystyle t} . This then allows us to write that probability as p i j ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{ij}(t)} . Theorem: Continuous-time transition matrices satisfy: P ( t + τ ) = P ( t ) P ( τ ) {\displaystyle P(t+\tau )=P(t)P(\tau )} Note: There is here a possible confusion between two meanings of the word transition. (i) In the context of Markov chains, transition is the general term for the change between two states. (ii) In the context of nucleotide changes in DNA sequences, transition is a specific term for the exchange between either the two purines (A ↔ G) or the two pyrimidines (C ↔ T) (for additional details, see the article about transitions in genetics). By contrast, an exchange between one purine and one pyrimidine is called a transversion. === Deriving the dynamics of substitution === Consider a DNA sequence of fixed length m evolving in time by base replacement. Assume that the processes followed by the m sites are Markovian independent, identically distributed and that the process is constant over time. For a particular site, let E = { A , G , C , T } {\displaystyle {\mathcal {E}}=\{A,\,G,\,C,\,T\}} be the set of possible states for the site, and p ( t ) = ( p A ( t ) , p G ( t ) , p C ( t ) , p T ( t ) ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} (t)=(p_{A}(t),\,p_{G}(t),\,p_{C}(t),\,p_{T}(t))} their respective probabilities at time t {\displaystyle t} . For two distinct x , y ∈ E {\displaystyle x,y\in {\mathcal {E}}} , let μ x y {\displaystyle \mu _{xy}\ } be the transition rate from state x {\displaystyle x} to state y {\displaystyle y} . Similarly, for any x {\displaystyle x} , let the total rate of change from x {\displaystyle x} be μ x = ∑ y ≠ x μ x y . {\displaystyle \mu _{x}=\sum _{y\neq x}\mu _{xy}\,.} The changes in the probability distribution p A ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{A}(t)} for small increments of time Δ t {\displaystyle \Delta t} are given by p A ( t + Δ t ) = p A ( t ) − p A ( t ) μ A Δ t + ∑ x ≠ A p x ( t ) μ x A Δ t . {\displaystyle p_{A}(t+\Delta t)=p_{A}(t)-p_{A}(t)\mu _{A}\Delta t+\sum _{x\neq A}p_{x}(t)\mu _{xA}\Delta t\,.} In other words, (in frequentist language), the frequency of A {\displaystyle A} 's at time t + Δ t {\displaystyle t+\Delta t} is equal to the frequency at time t {\displaystyle t} minus the frequency of the lost A {\displaystyle A} 's plus the frequency of the newly created A {\displaystyle A} 's. Similarly for the probabilities p G ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{G}(t)} , p C ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{C}(t)} and p T ( t ) {\displaystyle p_{T}(t)} . These equations can be written compactly as p ( t + Δ t ) = p ( t ) + p ( t ) Q Δ t , {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} (t+\Delta t)=\mathbf {p} (t)+\mathbf {p} (t)Q\Delta t\,,} where Q = ( − μ A μ A G μ A C μ A T μ G A − μ G μ G C μ G T μ C A μ C G − μ C μ C T μ T A μ T G μ T C − μ T ) {\displaystyle Q={\begin{pmatrix}-\mu _{A}&\mu _{AG}&\mu _{AC}&\mu _{AT}\\\mu _{GA}&-\mu _{G}&\mu _{GC}&\mu _{GT}\\\mu _{CA}&\mu _{CG}&-\mu _{C}&\mu _{CT}\\\mu _{TA}&\mu _{TG}&\mu _{TC}&-\mu _{T}\end{pmatrix}}} is known as the rate matrix. Note that, by definition, the sum of the entries in each row of Q {\displaystyle Q} is equal to zero. It follows that p ′ ( t ) = p ( t ) Q . {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} '(t)=\mathbf {p} (t)Q\,.} For a stationary process, where Q {\displaystyle Q} does not depend on time t, this differential equation can be solved. First, P ( t ) = exp ( t Q ) , {\displaystyle P(t)=\exp(tQ),} where exp ( t Q ) {\displaystyle \exp(tQ)} denotes the exponential of the matrix t Q {\displaystyle tQ} . As a result, p ( t ) = p ( 0 ) P ( t ) = p ( 0 ) exp ( t Q ) . {\displaystyle \mathbf {p} (t)=\mathbf {p} (0)P(t)=\mathbf {p} (0)\exp(tQ)\,.} === Ergodicity === If the Markov chain is irreducible, i.e. if it is always possible to go from a state x {\displaystyle x} to a state y {\displaystyle y} (possibly in several steps), then it is also ergodic. As a result, it has a unique stationary distribution π = { π x , x ∈ E } {\displaystyle {\boldsymbol {\pi }}=\{\pi _{x},\,x\in {\mathcal {E}}\}} , where π x {\displaystyle \pi _{x}} corresponds to the proportion of time spent in state x {\displaystyle x} after the Markov chain has run for an infinite amount of time. In DNA evo
Ross Quinlan
John Ross Quinlan is a computer science researcher in data mining and decision theory. He has contributed extensively to the development of decision tree algorithms, including inventing the canonical C4.5 and ID3 algorithms. He also contributed to early ILP literature with First Order Inductive Learner (FOIL). He is currently running the company RuleQuest Research which he founded in 1997. == Education == He received his BSc degree in Physics and Computing from the University of Sydney in 1965 and his computer science doctorate at the University of Washington in 1968. He has held positions at the University of New South Wales, University of Sydney, University of Technology Sydney, and RAND Corporation. == Artificial intelligence == Quinlan is a specialist in artificial intelligence, particularly in the aspect involving machine learning and its application to data mining. He is a Founding Fellow of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. === ID3 === Ross Quinlan invented the Iterative Dichotomiser 3 (ID3) algorithm which is used to generate decision trees. ID3 follows the principle of Occam's razor in attempting to create the smallest decision tree possible. === C4.5 === He then expanded upon the principles used in ID3 to create C4.5. C4.5 improved: discrete and continuous attributes, missing attribute values, attributes with differing costs, pruning trees (replacing irrelevant branches with leaf nodes). === C5.0 === C5.0, which Quinlan is commercially selling (single-threaded version is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License), is an improvement on C4.5. The advantages are speed (several orders of magnitude faster), memory efficiency, smaller decision trees, boosting (more accuracy), ability to weight different attributes, and winnowing (reducing noise). == Selected works == === Books === 1993. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. ISBN 1-55860-238-0. === Articles === Quinlan, J. R. (1982) Semi-autonomous acquisition of pattern-based knowledge, In Machine intelligence 10 (eds J. E. Hayes, D. Michie, and Y.-H. Pao). Ellis Norwood,Chichester. Quinlan, J.R. (1985). Decision trees and multi-valued attributes, In J.E. Hayes & D. Michie (Eds.), Machine intelligence 11. Oxford University Press. Quinlan, J. R. (1986). Induction of decision trees. Machine Learning, 1(1):81-106 2008. (with Qiang Yang, Philip S. Yu, Zhou Zhihua, and David Hand et al). Top 10 algorithms in data mining. Knowledge and Information Systems 14.1: 1-37 Quinlan, J. R. (1990). Learning logical definitions from relations. Machine Learning, 5:239-266.
Domain adaptation
Domain adaptation is a field associated with machine learning and transfer learning. It addresses the challenge of training a model on one data distribution (the source domain) and applying it to a related but different data distribution (the target domain). A common example is spam filtering, where a model trained on emails from one user (source domain) is adapted to handle emails for another user with significantly different patterns (target domain). Domain adaptation techniques can also leverage unrelated data sources to improve learning. When multiple source distributions are involved, the problem extends to multi-source domain adaptation. Domain adaptation is a specific type of transfer learning. According to the taxonomy laid out by Pan and Yang (2010), it falls into the category of transductive transfer learning. In this setting, the source and target tasks are the same (e.g., both are object recognition), but the domains differ (different marginal distributions). This distinguishes it from inductive transfer learning (where labeled data is available for the target task) and unsupervised transfer learning (where labels are unavailable in both domains). == Classification of domain adaptation problems == Domain adaptation setups are classified in two different ways: according to the distribution shift between the domains, and according to the available data from the target domain. === Distribution shifts === Common distribution shifts are classified as follows: Covariate Shift occurs when the input distributions of the source and destination change, but the relationship between inputs and labels remains unchanged. The above-mentioned spam filtering example typically falls in this category. Namely, the distributions (patterns) of emails may differ between the domains, but emails labeled as spam in the one domain should similarly be labeled in another. Prior Shift (Label Shift) occurs when the label distribution differs between the source and target datasets, while the conditional distribution of features given labels remains the same. An example is a classifier of hair color in images from Italy (source domain) and Norway (target domain). The proportions of hair colors (labels) differ, but images within classes like blond and black-haired populations remain consistent across domains. A classifier for the Norway population can exploit this prior knowledge of class proportions to improve its estimates. Concept Shift (Conditional Shift) refers to changes in the relationship between features and labels, even if the input distribution remains the same. For instance, in medical diagnosis, the same symptoms (inputs) may indicate entirely different diseases (labels) in different populations (domains). === Data available during training === Domain adaptation problems typically assume that some data from the target domain is available during training. Problems can be classified according to the type of this available data: Unsupervised: Unlabeled data from the target domain is available, but no labeled data. In the above-mentioned example of spam filtering, this corresponds to the case where emails from the target domain (user) are available, but they are not labeled as spam. Domain adaptation methods can benefit from such unlabeled data, by comparing its distribution (patterns) with the labeled source domain data. Semi-supervised: Most data that is available from the target domain is unlabelled, but some labeled data is also available. In the above-mentioned case of spam filter design, this corresponds to the case that the target user has labeled some emails as being spam or not. Supervised: All data that is available from the target domain is labeled. In this case, domain adaptation reduces to refinement of the source domain predictor. In the above-mentioned example classification of hair-color from images, this could correspond to the refinement of a network already trained on a large dataset of labeled images from Italy, using newly available labeled images from Norway. == Formalization == Let X {\displaystyle X} be the input space (or description space) and let Y {\displaystyle Y} be the output space (or label space). The objective of a machine learning algorithm is to learn a mathematical model (a hypothesis) h : X → Y {\displaystyle h:X\to Y} able to attach a label from Y {\displaystyle Y} to an example from X {\displaystyle X} . This model is learned from a learning sample S = { ( x i , y i ) ∈ ( X × Y ) } i = 1 m {\displaystyle S=\{(x_{i},y_{i})\in (X\times Y)\}_{i=1}^{m}} . Usually in supervised learning (without domain adaptation), we suppose that the examples ( x i , y i ) ∈ S {\displaystyle (x_{i},y_{i})\in S} are drawn i.i.d. from a distribution D S {\displaystyle D_{S}} of support X × Y {\displaystyle X\times Y} (unknown and fixed). The objective is then to learn h {\displaystyle h} (from S {\displaystyle S} ) such that it commits the least error possible for labelling new examples coming from the distribution D S {\displaystyle D_{S}} . The main difference between supervised learning and domain adaptation is that in the latter situation we study two different (but related) distributions D S {\displaystyle D_{S}} and D T {\displaystyle D_{T}} on X × Y {\displaystyle X\times Y} . The domain adaptation task then consists of the transfer of knowledge from the source domain D S {\displaystyle D_{S}} to the target one D T {\displaystyle D_{T}} . The goal is then to learn h {\displaystyle h} (from labeled or unlabelled samples coming from the two domains) such that it commits as little error as possible on the target domain D T {\displaystyle D_{T}} . The major issue is the following: if a model is learned from a source domain, what is its capacity to correctly label data coming from the target domain? == Four algorithmic principles == === Reweighting algorithms === The objective is to reweight the source labeled sample such that it "looks like" the target sample (in terms of the error measure considered). === Iterative algorithms === A method for adapting consists in iteratively "auto-labeling" the target examples. The principle is simple: a model h {\displaystyle h} is learned from the labeled examples; h {\displaystyle h} automatically labels some target examples; a new model is learned from the new labeled examples. Note that there exist other iterative approaches, but they usually need target labeled examples. === Search of a common representation space === The goal is to find or construct a common representation space for the two domains. The objective is to obtain a space in which the domains are close to each other while keeping good performances on the source labeling task. This can be achieved through the use of Adversarial machine learning techniques where feature representations from samples in different domains are encouraged to be indistinguishable. === Hierarchical Bayesian Model === The goal is to construct a Bayesian hierarchical model p ( n ) {\displaystyle p(n)} , which is essentially a factorization model for counts n {\displaystyle n} , to derive domain-dependent latent representations allowing both domain-specific and globally shared latent factors. == Software packages == Several compilations of domain adaptation and transfer learning algorithms have been implemented over the past decades: SKADA (Python) ADAPT (Python) TLlib (Python) Domain-Adaptation-Toolbox (MATLAB)
Clement Farabet
Clément Farabet is a computer scientist and AI expert known for his contributions to the field of deep learning. He served as a research scientist at the New York University. He serves as the Vice President of Research at Google DeepMind and previously served as the VP of AI Infrastructure at NVIDIA. His scholarly work received over 11,000 citations with an h-index of 21. == Education == In 2008, Farabet earned a master's degree in electrical engineering with honors from Institut national des sciences appliquées (INSA) de Lyon, France. In 2010, Farabet received his PhD at Université Paris-Est, co-advised by Professors Laurent Najman and Yann LeCun. His thesis focused on real-time image understanding and introduced multi-scale convolutional networks and graph-based techniques for efficient segmentations of class prediction maps. He successfully defended his thesis in 2013. == Career == In 2008, after completing his Master's degree, Farabet joined Professor Yann LeCun's laboratory at the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences at New York University. His Master's thesis work on reconfigurable hardware for deep neural networks resulted in a patent. He continued his collaboration with Yann LeCun, and in 2009, he began working with Yale University's e-Lab, led by Eugenio Culurciello. This collaboration eventually led to the creation of TeraDeep. He began his career as a researcher, contributing to the development of LuaTorch, one of the first AI frameworks, which later evolved into PyTorch, widely recognized and adopted globally. == Startups == Farabet co-founded MadBits, a startup with a focus on web-scale image understanding. The company was acquired by Twitter in 2014. Following this acquisition, Farabet co-founded Twitter Cortex, a team dedicated to building Twitter's deep learning platform for various applications, including recommendations, search, spam detection, and NSFW content and ads. == Publications == Farabet, Clement; Couprie, Camille; Najman, Laurent; LeCun, Yann (August 2013). "Learning Hierarchical Features for Scene Labeling". IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. 35 (8): 1915–1929. Bibcode:2013ITPAM..35.1915F. doi:10.1109/TPAMI.2012.231. PMID 23787344. S2CID 206765110. LeCun, Yann; Kavukcuoglu, Koray; Farabet, Clement (2010). "Convolutional networks and applications in vision". Proceedings of 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems. pp. 253–256. doi:10.1109/ISCAS.2010.5537907. ISBN 978-1-4244-5308-5. S2CID 7625356. Collobert, Ronan; Kavukcuoglu, K.; Farabet, C. (2011). "Torch7: A Matlab-like Environment for Machine Learning". Neural Information Processing Systems. Couprie, Camille; Farabet, Clément; Najman, Laurent; LeCun, Yann (16 January 2013). "Indoor Semantic Segmentation using depth information". arXiv:1301.3572 [cs.CV]. Farabet, Clement (2011). "NeuFlow: A runtime reconfigurable dataflow processor for vision". CVPR 2011 Workshops. pp. 109–116. doi:10.1109/CVPRW.2011.5981829. ISBN 978-1-4577-0529-8. S2CID 851574. Farabet, Clement (2009). "CNP: An FPGA-based processor for Convolutional Networks". 2009 International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications. pp. 32–37. doi:10.1109/FPL.2009.5272559. S2CID 5339694. Farabet, Clement (2010). "Hardware accelerated convolutional neural networks for synthetic vision systems". Proceedings of 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems. pp. 257–260. doi:10.1109/ISCAS.2010.5537908. ISBN 978-1-4244-5308-5. S2CID 6542026.