scholarly journals Active Function Learning

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Jones ◽  
Eric Schulz ◽  
Björn Meder ◽  
Azzurra Ruggeri

AbstractHow do people actively explore to learn about functional relationships, that is, how continuous inputs map onto continuous outputs? We introduce a novel paradigm to investigate information search in continuous, multi-feature function learning scenarios. Participants either actively selected or passively observed information to learn about an underlying linear function. We develop and compare different variants of rule-based (linear regression) and non-parametric (Gaussian process regression) active learning approaches to model participants’ active learning behavior. Our results show that participants’ performance is best described by a rule-based model that attempts to efficiently learn linear functions with a focus on high and uncertain outcomes. These results advance our understanding of how people actively search for information to learn about functional relations in the environment.

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (23) ◽  
pp. 17771-17785
Author(s):  
Antonio Candelieri ◽  
Riccardo Perego ◽  
Ilaria Giordani ◽  
Andrea Ponti ◽  
Francesco Archetti

AbstractModelling human function learning has been the subject of intense research in cognitive sciences. The topic is relevant in black-box optimization where information about the objective and/or constraints is not available and must be learned through function evaluations. In this paper, we focus on the relation between the behaviour of humans searching for the maximum and the probabilistic model used in Bayesian optimization. As surrogate models of the unknown function, both Gaussian processes and random forest have been considered: the Bayesian learning paradigm is central in the development of active learning approaches balancing exploration/exploitation in uncertain conditions towards effective generalization in large decision spaces. In this paper, we analyse experimentally how Bayesian optimization compares to humans searching for the maximum of an unknown 2D function. A set of controlled experiments with 60 subjects, using both surrogate models, confirm that Bayesian optimization provides a general model to represent individual patterns of active learning in humans.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antoine Taly ◽  
Francesco Nitti ◽  
Marc Baaden ◽  
samuela pasquali

<div>We present here an interdisciplinary workshop on the subject of biomolecules offered to undergraduate and high-school students with the aim of boosting their interest toward all areas of science contributing to the study of life. The workshop involves Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Computer Science and Biology. Based on our own areas of research, molecular modeling is chosen as central axis as it involves all disciplines. In order to provide a strong biological motivation for the study of the dynamics of biomolecules, the theme of the workshop is the origin of life. </div><div>All sessions are built around active pedagogies, including games, and a final poster presentation.</div>


2021 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 297-306
Author(s):  
Julius Krause ◽  
Maurice Günder ◽  
Daniel Schulz ◽  
Robin Gruna

Abstract The selection of training data determines the quality of a chemometric calibration model. In order to cover the entire parameter space of known influencing parameters, an experimental design is usually created. Nevertheless, even with a carefully prepared Design of Experiment (DoE), redundant reference analyses are often performed during the analysis of agricultural products. Because the number of possible reference analyses is usually very limited, the presented active learning approaches are intended to provide a tool for better selection of training samples.


2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andy M. Connor ◽  
Sangeeta Karmokar ◽  
Chris Whittington

This paper sets out to challenge the common pedagogies found in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) education with a particular focus on engineering. The dominant engineering pedagogy remains “chalk and talk”; despite research evidence that demonstrates its ineffectiveness. Such pedagogical approaches do not embrace the possibilities provided by more student-centric approaches and more active learning. The paper argues that there is a potential confusion in engineering education around the role of active learning approaches, and that the adoption of these approaches may be limited as a result of this confusion, combined with a degree of disciplinary egocentrism. The paper presents examples of design, engineering and technology projects that demonstrate the effectiveness of adopting pedagogies and delivery methods more usually attributed to the liberal arts such as studio based learning. The paper concludes with some suggestions about how best to create a fertile environment from which inquiry based learning can emerge as well as a reflection on whether the only real limitation on cultivating such approaches is the disciplinary egocentrism of traditional engineering educators.


2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 63-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaurav Khatwani ◽  
Praveen Ranjan Srivastava

As information technology has evolved, digital media has become increasingly fragmented and has started to proliferate multiple information channels. In order to optimize on the various digital channels that are available, organizations are increasingly recognizing the importance of gaining solid insights into consumer behavior and preferences that can be translated into marketing strategies. Specifically, they are keen to identify which information channels they can use to effectively reach and communicate with their target market. In this regard, this paper describes how multi criteria decision making can be used to develop a new method of decision making that will enable an effective and systematic decision process of fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS. Further, these techniques can be used for the developing framework for identifying consumer preferences. This paper provides a demonstration of the underpinning working methodology of the proposed model by examining an real case that is based on the decision process Internet users employ during their online search for information.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikhail Sokolov

Why do scholars pay attention to some works, and recognize the influence of their authors, but not others? The Mertonian approach suggests that scholars search for information instrumental in producing their knowledge claims and reward authors for making important contributions. The critical sociology of science approach explains recognition (e.g. in the form of citing) as rhetorical practices that strengthen one’s credibility. Both models fail to explain why academics sometimes ignore apparently relevant sources or how groups of scholars turn into bubbles, censoring information about findings made outside of them. According to the theoretical model suggested in this paper, what governs information search is not first-order relevance (what individual academics considers relevant), but second-order awareness (what they know their audiences are aware of). In this model, the search for information is mostly governed by the necessity to make successful claims of novelty – to present findings that are new to one’s audience. Individuals easily disregard findings their audiences are unaware of. Institutionally organized audiences thus serve as enforcers of information search, and their members may tacitly collaborate in maintaining unawareness of intellectual developments outside of their common attention space In the empirical part of the paper, we use the example of post-Soviet sociology to test the predictions following from this model: (1) that scarcity of enforcement results in an overall shrinking of individuals’ attention spaces, and in their attaining idiosyncratic configurations; (2) that when borders of audiences cross-cut legitimate classifications, attention spaces are shaped by the former, rather than the latter; (3) that as a reaction to such cross-cutting, new classifications are introduced, legitimizing existing inattention.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document