DOCSLIB.ORG

Discriminative Unsupervised Dimensionality Reduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Discriminative Unsupervised Dimensionality Reduction Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2015) Discriminative Unsupervised Dimensionality Reduction Xiaoqian Wang, Yun Liu, Feiping Nie, Heng Huang∗ University of Texas at Arlington Arlington, Texas 76019, USA [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract the high dimensional ambient. Multitudinous supervised and unsupervised dimensionality reduction methods have been As an important machine learning topic, dimen- put forward, such as PCA (Principal Component Analysis), sionality reduction has been widely studied and uti- LDA (Linear Discriminant Analysis), LLE [Roweis and Saul, lized in various kinds of areas. A multitude of 2000], LPP [Niyogi, 2004], shift invariant LPP [Nie et al., dimensionality reduction methods have been de- 2014a], NMMP [Nie et al., 2007], TRACK [Wang et al., veloped, among which unsupervised dimensional- 2014], etc. In the circumstances where accessing label of ity reduction is more desirable when obtaining la- the data is intricate, unsupervised dimensionality reduction bel information requires onerous work. However, methods are more favorable. Meanwhile, among the tremen- most previous unsupervised dimensionality reduc- dous number of unsupervised dimensionality reduction meth- tion methods call for an affinity graph constructed ods, graph embedding method is laid more emphasis on since beforehand, with which the following dimension- graph and manifold information are utilized within. ality reduction steps can be then performed. Sepa- However, most of state-of-the-art graph based dimension- ration of graph construction and dimensionality re- ality reduction methods require an affinity graph constructed duction leads the dimensionality reduction process before hand, which makes their projection ability dependent highly dependent on quality of the input graph. In heavily on the input of graph. However, due to the sepa- this paper, we propose a novel graph embedding rated learning processes, the constructed graph may not be method for unsupervised dimensionality reduction. optimal for the later dimensionality reduction. To address We simultaneously conduct dimensionality reduc- this problem, in this paper, we propose a novel graph em- tion along with graph construction by assigning bedding method for unsupervised dimensionality reduction adaptive and optimal neighbors according to the which asks for no input of the graph. Instead, graph construc- projected local distances. Our method doesn’t need tion in our model is conducted simultaneously with dimen- an affinity graph constructed in advance, but in- sionality reduction. We assign adaptive and optimal neigh- stead learns the graph concurrently with dimen- bors on the basis of the projected local distances. Our main sionality reduction. Thus, the learned graph is opti- assumption is that data with lower distance apart usually has mal for dimensionality reduction. Meanwhile, our a larger probability to be connected, which is a common hy- learned graph has an explicit block diagonal struc- pothesis in previous graph based methods [Nie et al., 2014b]. ture, from which the clustering results could be di- Also, we constrain the learned graph to an ideal structure rectly revealed without any postprocessing steps. where the graph is block diagonal with the number of con- Extensive empirical results on dimensionality re- nected components to be exactly the number of clusters in duction as well as clustering are presented to cor- the data, such that the constructed graph also uncovers the roborate the performance of our method. data cluster structure to enhance the graph quality. 1 Introduction 2 Related Work Natural and social science applications are crowded with high-dimensional data in this day and age. However, in PCA is the most famous dimensionality reduction method, most cases these data are literally characterized by an under- which is meant to find the projection direction where the variance of data is maximized. Since the variance of pro- lying low-dimensional space. This interesting phenomenon n n draws high attention to dimensionality reduction researches P P T T 2 jected data can be rewritten as W xi − W xj 2 = which focus on discovering intrinsic manifold structure from i j tr(W T XHXT W ), where H is the centering matrix as: ∗Corresponding Author. X. Wang and Y. Liu contribute equally to this paper. This work was partially supported by NSF IIS- 1 H = I − 11T ; (1) 1117965, IIS-1302675, IIS-1344152, DBI-1356628. n 3925 and the goal of PCA is to solve: graph construction by assigning adaptive and optimal neigh- T T bors on the basis of the projected local distances. Our funda- max tr(W XHX W ) : mental standing point is that data with lower distance apart W T W =I usually has a larger probability to be connected, in other However, as is pointed out in [Welling, 2005], PCA goes in- words, in the same cluster. Also, we constrain the learned capable when distances between classes lower down while graph to an ideal structure where the graph is block diagonal the scale of each class is still large in a certain degree, as we with the number of connected components to be exactly the can imagine the case where several cigars are placed closely, number of clusters in the data. The detailed description on with each cigar representing the distribution of data in one how we implement dimensionality reduction and graph con- class. struction at the same time and what remarkable properties of Afterwards, LDA was proposed to accomplish a better di- the learned graph have will be exhibited in the next section. mensionality reduction task as it was devoted to minimizing the within class distance, Sw, while maximizing the between class distance, Sb. Nevertheless, LDA also encounters sev- 3 Graph Embedding Discriminative eral problems. For example, the small sample size problem Unsupervised Dimension Reduction occurs when the number of samples is smaller than the num- ber of data dimensions. Researchers have came up with nu- We hope to learn the optimal affinity graph S to optimize merous ways to overcome this obstacle. Authors in [Chen et the projection matrix W for unsupervised dimensionality re- al., 2000] put forward an approach to finding the most dis- duction. Ideally, we should learn both S and W simulta- criminative information in the null space of Sw which then neously in a unified objective. To design the proper learn- evades the computational difficulty generated by the singu- ing model, we hope to emphasize the following ideas: 1) n×n larity of Sw in Fisher LDA. Another research [Yu and Yang, The affinity matrix S 2 R and projection matrix W are 2001] indicates that by discarding the null space of S , which mutually learned, e.g. optimize S and W simultaneously in b n n is non-informative, one can solve the traditional LDA prob- P P T T 2 min W xi − W xj 2 sij (previous methods learned lem from a better point of view. W;S i j Whereas, all these LDA methods mentioned above ne- S separately and only optimize W in dimensionality reduc- cessitate the knowledge of data labels, which may not be tion). 2) The learned affinity matrix S implies the probability always easily accessible, especially in the cases where la- of each data point in X to connect with its neighbors, i.e. a beling a data calls for mountains of work. Researches in larger probability should be assigned to a pair with smaller the state of art come up with graph embedding methods, distance, such that the graph structure is interpretable. 3) The among which LPP can be seen as an representative exam- data variance in the embedding space is maximized to retain ple. Given data X 2 Rd×n, suppose we are to learn a pro- most information. jection matrix W 2 Rd×m, where m is the number of di- Based the above considerations, we can build the following mension we’d like to reduce to. The idea of LPP works like objective: this: firstly learn an affinity graph S showing pairwise affin- ity between data points and then find a ”good” mapping by n 2 P W T x − W T x s [ i j 2 ij tackling the following problem Belkin and Niyogi, 2001; i;j=1 Niyogi, 2004]: min (2) S;W tr(W T XHXT W ) n n T T X X T T 2 s:t: 8i; si 1 = 1; 0 ≤ sij ≤ 1;W W = I; min W xi − W xj sij ; W T XDXT W =I 2 i j where H is the centering matrix define in Eq. (1). where D is the degree matrix of S. However, Problem (2) has a trivial solution that only the T Also, there is another variant of this model published in nearest data point of W xi is assigned a probability as 1 [Kokiopoulou and Saad, 2007]: while all others assigned 0, that is to say, xi is connected with only its nearest neighbor in the projected space. n n X X T T 2 That is definitely not what we expect. Instead, we hope min W xi − W xj sij : W T W =I 2 the learned affinity graph can maintain or enhance the data i j cluster relations, such that the projected data don’t destroy Despite the fact that no more do these graph embedding meth- such important structure. The desired result is that we project ods require label information, it is still a must that an affinity the data to a low-dimensional subspace where the probabil- graph constructed ahead of time to work as the input. These ity within cluster is nonzero and evenly distributed while the methods separate dimensionality reduction and graph con- probability between clusters is zero. struction, thus depend on quality of the input affinity graph The assumption of this ideal structure describes a block to a large extent, where poor quality graph gives rise to erro- diagonal graph whose number of connected components is neous dimensionality reduction.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nonlinear Dimensionality Reduction by Locally Linear Embedding
    R EPORTS 2 ˆ 35. R. N. Shepard, Psychon. Bull. Rev. 1, 2 (1994). 1ÐR (DM, DY). DY is the matrix of Euclidean distanc- ing the coordinates of corresponding points {xi, yi}in 36. J. B. Tenenbaum, Adv. Neural Info. Proc. Syst. 10, 682 es in the low-dimensional embedding recovered by both spaces provided by Isomap together with stan- ˆ (1998). each algorithm. DM is each algorithm’s best estimate dard supervised learning techniques (39). 37. T. Martinetz, K. Schulten, Neural Netw. 7, 507 (1994). of the intrinsic manifold distances: for Isomap, this is 44. Supported by the Mitsubishi Electric Research Labo- 38. V. Kumar, A. Grama, A. Gupta, G. Karypis, Introduc- the graph distance matrix DG; for PCA and MDS, it is ratories, the Schlumberger Foundation, the NSF tion to Parallel Computing: Design and Analysis of the Euclidean input-space distance matrix DX (except (DBS-9021648), and the DARPA Human ID program. Algorithms (Benjamin/Cummings, Redwood City, CA, with the handwritten “2”s, where MDS uses the We thank Y. LeCun for making available the MNIST 1994), pp. 257Ð297. tangent distance). R is the standard linear correlation database and S. Roweis and L. Saul for sharing related ˆ 39. D. Beymer, T. Poggio, Science 272, 1905 (1996). coefficient, taken over all entries of DM and DY. unpublished work. For many helpful discussions, we 40. Available at www.research.att.com/ϳyann/ocr/mnist. 43. In each sequence shown, the three intermediate im- thank G. Carlsson, H. Farid, W. Freeman, T. Griffiths, 41. P. Y. Simard, Y. LeCun, J.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Dimensionality Reduction Techniques on Audio Signals
    Comparison of Dimensionality Reduction Techniques on Audio Signals Tamás Pál, Dániel T. Várkonyi Eötvös Loránd University, Faculty of Informatics, Department of Data Science and Engineering, Telekom Innovation Laboratories, Budapest, Hungary {evwolcheim, varkonyid}@inf.elte.hu WWW home page: http://t-labs.elte.hu Abstract: Analysis of audio signals is widely used and this work: car horn, dog bark, engine idling, gun shot, and very effective technique in several domains like health- street music [5]. care, transportation, and agriculture. In a general process Related work is presented in Section 2, basic mathe- the output of the feature extraction method results in huge matical notation used is described in Section 3, while the number of relevant features which may be difficult to pro- different methods of the pipeline are briefly presented in cess. The number of features heavily correlates with the Section 4. Section 5 contains data about the evaluation complexity of the following machine learning method. Di- methodology, Section 6 presents the results and conclu- mensionality reduction methods have been used success- sions are formulated in Section 7. fully in recent times in machine learning to reduce com- The goal of this paper is to find a combination of feature plexity and memory usage and improve speed of following extraction and dimensionality reduction methods which ML algorithms. This paper attempts to compare the state can be most efficiently applied to audio data visualization of the art dimensionality reduction techniques as a build- in 2D and preserve inter-class relations the most. ing block of the general process and analyze the usability of these methods in visualizing large audio datasets.
    [Show full text]
  • Litrec Vs. Movielens a Comparative Study
    LitRec vs. Movielens A Comparative Study Paula Cristina Vaz1;4, Ricardo Ribeiro2;4 and David Martins de Matos3;4 1IST/UAL, Rua Alves Redol, 9, Lisboa, Portugal 2ISCTE-IUL, Rua Alves Redol, 9, Lisboa, Portugal 3IST, Rua Alves Redol, 9, Lisboa, Portugal 4INESC-ID, Rua Alves Redol, 9, Lisboa, Portugal fpaula.vaz, ricardo.ribeiro, [email protected] Keywords: Recommendation Systems, Data Set, Book Recommendation. Abstract: Recommendation is an important research area that relies on the availability and quality of the data sets in order to make progress. This paper presents a comparative study between Movielens, a movie recommendation data set that has been extensively used by the recommendation system research community, and LitRec, a newly created data set for content literary book recommendation, in a collaborative filtering set-up. Experiments have shown that when the number of ratings of Movielens is reduced to the level of LitRec, collaborative filtering results degrade and the use of content in hybrid approaches becomes important. 1 INTRODUCTION and (b) assess its suitability in recommendation stud- ies. The number of books, movies, and music items pub- The paper is structured as follows: Section 2 de- lished every year is increasing far more quickly than scribes related work on recommendation systems and is our ability to process it. The Internet has shortened existing data sets. In Section 3 we describe the collab- the distance between items and the common user, orative filtering (CF) algorithm and prediction equa- making items available to everyone with an Internet tion, as well as different item representation. Section connection.
    [Show full text]
  • Unsupervised Speech Representation Learning Using Wavenet Autoencoders Jan Chorowski, Ron J
    1 Unsupervised speech representation learning using WaveNet autoencoders Jan Chorowski, Ron J. Weiss, Samy Bengio, Aaron¨ van den Oord Abstract—We consider the task of unsupervised extraction speaker gender and identity, from phonetic content, properties of meaningful latent representations of speech by applying which are consistent with internal representations learned autoencoding neural networks to speech waveforms. The goal by speech recognizers [13], [14]. Such representations are is to learn a representation able to capture high level semantic content from the signal, e.g. phoneme identities, while being desired in several tasks, such as low resource automatic speech invariant to confounding low level details in the signal such as recognition (ASR), where only a small amount of labeled the underlying pitch contour or background noise. Since the training data is available. In such scenario, limited amounts learned representation is tuned to contain only phonetic content, of data may be sufficient to learn an acoustic model on the we resort to using a high capacity WaveNet decoder to infer representation discovered without supervision, but insufficient information discarded by the encoder from previous samples. Moreover, the behavior of autoencoder models depends on the to learn the acoustic model and a data representation in a fully kind of constraint that is applied to the latent representation. supervised manner [15], [16]. We compare three variants: a simple dimensionality reduction We focus on representations learned with autoencoders bottleneck, a Gaussian Variational Autoencoder (VAE), and a applied to raw waveforms and spectrogram features and discrete Vector Quantized VAE (VQ-VAE). We analyze the quality investigate the quality of learned representations on LibriSpeech of learned representations in terms of speaker independence, the ability to predict phonetic content, and the ability to accurately re- [17].
    [Show full text]
  • Unsupervised Speech Representation Learning Using Wavenet Autoencoders
    Unsupervised speech representation learning using WaveNet autoencoders https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.08810 Jan Chorowski University of Wrocław 06.06.2019 Deep Model = Hierarchy of Concepts Cat Dog … Moon Banana M. Zieler, “Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networks” Deep Learning history: 2006 2006: Stacked RBMs Hinton, Salakhutdinov, “Reducing the Dimensionality of Data with Neural Networks” Deep Learning history: 2012 2012: Alexnet SOTA on Imagenet Fully supervised training Deep Learning Recipe 1. Get a massive, labeled dataset 퐷 = {(푥, 푦)}: – Comp. vision: Imagenet, 1M images – Machine translation: EuroParlamanet data, CommonCrawl, several million sent. pairs – Speech recognition: 1000h (LibriSpeech), 12000h (Google Voice Search) – Question answering: SQuAD, 150k questions with human answers – … 2. Train model to maximize log 푝(푦|푥) Value of Labeled Data • Labeled data is crucial for deep learning • But labels carry little information: – Example: An ImageNet model has 30M weights, but ImageNet is about 1M images from 1000 classes Labels: 1M * 10bit = 10Mbits Raw data: (128 x 128 images): ca 500 Gbits! Value of Unlabeled Data “The brain has about 1014 synapses and we only live for about 109 seconds. So we have a lot more parameters than data. This motivates the idea that we must do a lot of unsupervised learning since the perceptual input (including proprioception) is the only place we can get 105 dimensions of constraint per second.” Geoff Hinton https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/2lmo0l/ama_geoffrey_hinton/ Unsupervised learning recipe 1. Get a massive labeled dataset 퐷 = 푥 Easy, unlabeled data is nearly free 2. Train model to…??? What is the task? What is the loss function? Unsupervised learning by modeling data distribution Train the model to minimize − log 푝(푥) E.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Dimensionality Reduction and Principal Component Analysis
    Dimensionality Reduction Before running any ML algorithm on our data, we may want to reduce the number of features Dimensionality Reduction and Principal ● To save computer memory/disk space if the data are large. Component Analysis ● To reduce execution time. ● To visualize our data, e.g., if the dimensions can be reduced to 2 or 3. Dimensionality Reduction results in an Projecting Data - 2D to 1D approximation of the original data x2 x1 Original 50% 5% 1% Projecting Data - 2D to 1D Projecting Data - 2D to 1D x2 x2 x2 x1 x1 x1 Projecting Data - 2D to 1D Projecting Data - 2D to 1D new feature new feature Projecting Data - 3D to 2D Projecting Data - 3D to 2D Projecting Data - 3D to 2D Why such projections are effective ● In many datasets, some of the features are correlated. ● Correlated features can often be well approximated by a smaller number of new features. ● For example, consider the problem of predicting housing prices. Some of the features may be the square footage of the house, number of bedrooms, number of bathrooms, and lot size. These features are likely correlated. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) Principal Component Analysis (PCA) Suppose we want to reduce data from d dimensions to k dimensions, where d > k. Determine new basis. PCA finds k vectors onto which to project the data so that the Project data onto k axes of new projection errors are minimized. basis with largest variance. In other words, PCA finds the principal components, which offer the best approximation. PCA ≠ Linear Regression PCA Algorithm Given n data
    [Show full text]
  • Collaborative Filtering: a Machine Learning Perspective by Benjamin Marlin a Thesis Submitted in Conformity with the Requirement
    Collaborative Filtering: A Machine Learning Perspective by Benjamin Marlin A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Graduate Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Copyright c 2004 by Benjamin Marlin Abstract Collaborative Filtering: A Machine Learning Perspective Benjamin Marlin Master of Science Graduate Department of Computer Science University of Toronto 2004 Collaborative filtering was initially proposed as a framework for filtering information based on the preferences of users, and has since been refined in many different ways. This thesis is a comprehensive study of rating-based, pure, non-sequential collaborative filtering. We analyze existing methods for the task of rating prediction from a machine learning perspective. We show that many existing methods proposed for this task are simple applications or modifications of one or more standard machine learning methods for classification, regression, clustering, dimensionality reduction, and density estima- tion. We introduce new prediction methods in all of these classes. We introduce a new experimental procedure for testing stronger forms of generalization than has been used previously. We implement a total of nine prediction methods, and conduct large scale prediction accuracy experiments. We show interesting new results on the relative performance of these methods. ii Acknowledgements I would like to begin by thanking my supervisor Richard Zemel for introducing me to the field of collaborative filtering, for numerous helpful discussions about a multitude of models and methods, and for many constructive comments about this thesis itself. I would like to thank my second reader Sam Roweis for his thorough review of this thesis, as well as for many interesting discussions of this and other research.
    [Show full text]
  • 13 Dimensionality Reduction and Microarray Data
    13 Dimensionality Reduction and Microarray data David A. Elizondo, Benjamin N. Passow, Ralph Birkenhead, and Andreas Huemer Centre for Computational Intelligence, School of Computing, Faculty of Computing Sciences and Engineering, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK,{elizondo,passow,rab,ahuemer}@dmu.ac.uk Summary. Microarrays are being currently used for the expression levels of thou- sands of genes simultaneously. They present new analytical challenges because they have a very high input dimension and a very low sample size. It is highly com- plex to analyse multi-dimensional data with complex geometry and to identify low- dimensional “principal objects” that relate to the optimal projection while losing the least amount of information. Several methods have been proposed for dimensionality reduction of microarray data. Some of these methods include principal component analysis and principal manifolds. This article presents a comparison study of the performance of the linear principal component analysis and the non linear local tan- gent space alignment principal manifold methods on such a problem. Two microarray data sets will be used in this study. A classification model will be created using fully dimensional and dimensionality reduced data sets. To measure the amount of infor- mation lost with the two dimensionality reduction methods, the level of performance of each of the methods will be measured in terms of level of generalisation obtained by the classification models on previously unseen data sets. These results will be compared with the ones obtained using the fully dimensional data sets. Key words: Microarray data; Principal Manifolds; Principal Component Analysis; Local Tangent Space Alignment; Linear Separability; Neural Net- works.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Retrieval Perspective to Nonlinear Dimensionality Reduction for Data Visualization
    JournalofMachineLearningResearch11(2010)451-490 Submitted 4/09; Revised 12/09; Published 2/10 Information Retrieval Perspective to Nonlinear Dimensionality Reduction for Data Visualization Jarkko Venna [email protected] Jaakko Peltonen [email protected] Kristian Nybo [email protected] Helena Aidos [email protected] Samuel Kaski [email protected] Aalto University School of Science and Technology Department of Information and Computer Science P.O. Box 15400, FI-00076 Aalto, Finland Editor: Yoshua Bengio Abstract Nonlinear dimensionality reduction methods are often used to visualize high-dimensional data, al- though the existing methods have been designed for other related tasks such as manifold learning. It has been difficult to assess the quality of visualizations since the task has not been well-defined. We give a rigorous definition for a specific visualization task, resulting in quantifiable goodness measures and new visualization methods. The task is information retrieval given the visualization: to find similar data based on the similarities shown on the display. The fundamental tradeoff be- tween precision and recall of information retrieval can then be quantified in visualizations as well. The user needs to give the relative cost of missing similar points vs. retrieving dissimilar points, after which the total cost can be measured. We then introduce a new method NeRV (neighbor retrieval visualizer) which produces an optimal visualization by minimizing the cost. We further derive a variant for supervised visualization; class information is taken rigorously into account when computing the similarity relationships. We show empirically that the unsupervised version outperforms existing unsupervised dimensionality reduction methods in the visualization task, and the supervised version outperforms existing supervised methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Collaborative Filtering: a Machine Learning Perspective Chapter 6: Dimensionality Reduction
    Collaborative Filtering: A Machine Learning Perspective Chapter 6: Dimensionality Reduction Benjamin Marlin Presenter: Chaitanya Desai Collaborative Filtering: A Machine Learning Perspective – p.1/18 Topics we'll cover Dimensionality Reduction for rating prediction: Singular Value Decomposition Principal Component Analysis Collaborative Filtering: A Machine Learning Perspective – p.2/18 Rating Prediction Problem Description: We have M distinct items and N distinct users in our corpus u Let ry be rating assigned by user u for item y. Thus, we have (M dimensional) rating vectors ru for the N users Task: Given the partially filled rating vector ra of an active a user a, we want to estimate rˆy for all items y that have not yet been rated by a Collaborative Filtering: A Machine Learning Perspective – p.3/18 Singular Value Decomposition Given a data matrix D of size N × M, the SVD of D is D T = UΣV where UN×N and VM×M are orthogonal and ΣN×M is diagonal columns of U are eigenvectors of DDT and columns of V are eigenvectors of DT D Σ is diagonal and entries comprise of eigenvalues ordered according to eigenvectors (i.e. columns of U and V ) Collaborative Filtering: A Machine Learning Perspective – p.4/18 Low Rank Approximation T Given the solution to SVD, we know that Dˆ = UkΣkVk is the best rank k approximation to D under the Frobenius norm The Frobenius norm is given by N M ˆ ˆ 2 F (D − D) = X X(Dnm − Dnm) n=1 m=1 Collaborative Filtering: A Machine Learning Perspective – p.5/18 Weighted Low Rank Approximation D contains many missing values
    [Show full text]
  • Accent Transfer with Discrete Representation Learning and Latent Space Disentanglement
    Accent Transfer with Discrete Representation Learning and Latent Space Disentanglement Renee Li Paul Mure Dept. of Computer Science Dept. of Computer Science Stanford University Stanford University [email protected] [email protected] Abstract The task of accent transfer has recently become a field actively under research. In fact, several companies were established with the goal of tackling this challenging problem. We designed and implemented a model using WaveNet and a multitask learner to transfer accents within a paragraph of English speech. In contrast to the actual WaveNet, our architecture made several adaptations to compensate for the fact that WaveNet does not work well for drastic dimensionality reduction due to the use of residual and skip connections, and we added a multitask learner in order to learn the style of the accent. 1 Introduction In this paper, we explored the task of accent transfer in English speech. This is an interesting problem because it shows the ability of neural network to generate novel contents based on partial information, and this problem has not been explored as much as some of the other topics in style transfer. We believe that this task is very interesting and challenging because we will be developing the state-of-the-art model for our specific task: while there are some published papers about accent classification, so far, we have not been able to find a good pre-trained model to use for evaluating our results. Moreover, raw audio generative models are also a very active field of research, so there is not much literature or implementations for relevant tasks.
    [Show full text]
  • Text Comparison Using Word Vector Representations and Dimensionality Reduction
    PROC. OF THE 8th EUR. CONF. ON PYTHON IN SCIENCE (EUROSCIPY 2015) 13 Text comparison using word vector representations and dimensionality reduction Hendrik Heuer∗† F Abstract—This paper describes a technique to compare large text sources text sources. To compare the topics in source A and source using word vector representations (word2vec) and dimensionality reduction (t- B, three different sets of words can be computed: a set of SNE) and how it can be implemented using Python. The technique provides a unique words in source A, a set of unique words in source B bird’s-eye view of text sources, e.g. text summaries and their source material, as well as the intersection set of words both in source A and and enables users to explore text sources like a geographical map. Word vector representations capture many linguistic properties such as gender, tense, B. These three sets are then plotted at the same time. For this, plurality and even semantic concepts like "capital city of". Using dimensionality a colour is assigned to each set of words. This enables the reduction, a 2D map can be computed where semantically similar words are user to visually compare the different text sources and makes close to each other. The technique uses the word2vec model from the gensim it possible to see which topics are covered where. The user Python library and t-SNE from scikit-learn. can explore the word map and zoom in and out. He or she can also toggle the visibility, i.e. show and hide, certain word Index Terms—Text Comparison, Topic Comparison, word2vec, t-SNE sets.
    [Show full text]