We discuss the objectives of any endeavor in creating artificial intelligence, AI, and provide a possible alternative. Intelligence might be an unintended consequence of curiosity left to roam free, best exemplified by a frolicking infant. This suggests that our attempts at AI could have been misguided; what we actually need to strive for can be termed artificial curiosity, AC, and intelligence happens as a consequence of those efforts. For this unintentional yet welcome aftereffect to set in a foundational list of guiding principles needs to be present. We discuss what these essential doctrines might be and why their establishment is required to form connections, possibly growing, between a knowledge store that has been built up and new pieces of information that curiosity will bring back. As more findings are acquired and more bonds are fermented, we need a way to, periodically, reduce the amount of data; in the sense, it is important to capture the critical characteristics of what has been accumulated or produce a summary of what has been gathered. We start with the intuition for this line of reasoning and formalize it with a series of models (and iterative improvements) that will be necessary to make the incubation of intelligence a reality. Our discussion provides conceptual modifications to the Turing Test and to Searle’s Chinese room argument. We discuss the future implications for society as AI becomes an integral part of life. Artificial Intelligence: A Child’s Play

This survey presents an overview of verification techniques for autonomous systems, with a focus on safety-critical autonomous cyber-physical systems (CPS) and subcomponents thereof. Autonomy in CPS is enabling by recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) through approaches such as deep neural networks (DNNs), embedded in so-called learning enabled components (LECs) that accomplish tasks from classification to control. Recently, the formal methods and formal verification community has developed methods to characterize behaviors in these LECs with eventual goals of formally verifying specifications for LECs, and this article presents a survey of many of these recent approaches. Verification for Machine Learning, Autonomy, and Neural Networks Survey

There is no consensus on the state-of-the-art approach to historical text normalization. Many techniques have been proposed, including rule-based methods, distance metrics, character-based statistical machine translation, and neural encoder–decoder models, but studies have used different datasets, different evaluation methods, and have come to different conclusions. This paper presents the largest study of historical text normalization done so far. We critically survey the existing literature and report experiments on eight languages, comparing systems spanning all categories of proposed normalization techniques, analysing the effect of training data quantity, and using different evaluation methods. The datasets and scripts are made publicly available. A Large-Scale Comparison of Historical Text Normalization Systems

This tutorial provides a gentle introduction to kernel density estimation (KDE) and recent advances regarding confidence bands and geometric/topological features. We begin with a discussion of basic properties of KDE: the convergence rate under various metrics, density derivative estimation, and bandwidth selection. Then, we introduce common approaches to the construction of confidence intervals/bands, and we discuss how to handle bias. Next, we talk about recent advances in the inference of geometric and topological features of a density function using KDE. Finally, we illustrate how one can use KDE to estimate a cumulative distribution function and a receiver operating characteristic curve. We provide R implementations related to this tutorial at the end. A Tutorial on Kernel Density Estimation and Recent Advances

Despite the huge empirical success of deep learning, theoretical understanding of neural networks learning process is still lacking. This is the reason, why some of its features seem ‘mysterious’. We emphasize two mysteries of deep learning: generalization mystery, and optimization mystery. In this essay we review and draw connections between several selected works concerning the latter. An Essay on Optimization Mystery of Deep Learning

We present seven myths commonly believed to be true in machine learning research, circa Feb 2019. This is an archival copy of the blog post at https://crazyoscarchang.github.io/2019/02/16/seven-myths-in-machine-learning-research/ Seven Myths in Machine Learning Research

Graphical causal inference as pioneered by Judea Pearl arose from research on artificial intelligence (AI), and for a long time had little connection to the field of machine learning. This article discusses where links have been and should be established, introducing key concepts along the way. It argues that the hard open problems of machine learning and AI are intrinsically related to causality, and explains how the field is beginning to understand them. Causality for Machine Learning

In this paper we will provide an introductory understanding of random graph models, and matchings in the case of Erdos-Renyi random graphs. We will provide a synthesis of background theory to this end. We will further examine pertinent recent results and provide a basis of further exploration. Random Graph Models and Matchings

Despite impressive performance on numerous visual tasks, Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) — unlike brains — are often highly sensitive to small perturbations of their input, e.g. adversarial noise leading to erroneous decisions. We propose to regularize CNNs using large-scale neuroscience data to learn more robust neural features in terms of representational similarity. We presented natural images to mice and measured the responses of thousands of neurons from cortical visual areas. Next, we denoised the notoriously variable neural activity using strong predictive models trained on this large corpus of responses from the mouse visual system, and calculated the representational similarity for millions of pairs of images from the model’s predictions. We then used the neural representation similarity to regularize CNNs trained on image classification by penalizing intermediate representations that deviated from neural ones. This preserved performance of baseline models when classifying images under standard benchmarks, while maintaining substantially higher performance compared to baseline or control models when classifying noisy images. Moreover, the models regularized with cortical representations also improved model robustness in terms of adversarial attacks. This demonstrates that regularizing with neural data can be an effective tool to create an inductive bias towards more robust inference. Learning From Brains How to Regularize Machines

With the fast development of various positioning techniques such as Global Position System (GPS), mobile devices and remote sensing, spatio-temporal data has become increasingly available nowadays. Mining valuable knowledge from spatio-temporal data is critically important to many real world applications including human mobility understanding, smart transportation, urban planning, public safety, health care and environmental management. As the number, volume and resolution of spatio-temporal datasets increase rapidly, traditional data mining methods, especially statistics based methods for dealing with such data are becoming overwhelmed. Recently, with the advances of deep learning techniques, deep leaning models such as convolutional neural network (CNN) and recurrent neural network (RNN) have enjoyed considerable success in various machine learning tasks due to their powerful hierarchical feature learning ability in both spatial and temporal domains, and have been widely applied in various spatio-temporal data mining (STDM) tasks such as predictive learning, representation learning, anomaly detection and classification. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive survey on recent progress in applying deep learning techniques for STDM. We first categorize the types of spatio-temporal data and briefly introduce the popular deep learning models that are used in STDM. Then a framework is introduced to show a general pipeline of the utilization of deep learning models for STDM. Next we classify existing literatures based on the types of ST data, the data mining tasks, and the deep learning models, followed by the applications of deep learning for STDM in different domains including transportation, climate science, human mobility, location based social network, crime analysis, and neuroscience. Finally, we conclude the limitations of current research and point out future research directions. Deep Learning for Spatio-Temporal Data Mining: A Survey