What is the difference between AI and ML?

What is the difference between Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning?

My students often ask the question: “What is the difference between Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) – and is deep learning (DL) belonging to either AI or ML?”. In the following I provide a I) brief answer, a II) formal short answer and III) a more elaborated answer:

I) Brief answer: It is the same and it is different. Deep Learning can also belong to both, and: both are necessary. This explains well why HCI-KDD is so enormously important: Human–Computer Interaction (HCI) deals mainly with aspects of human perception, human cognition, human intelligence, sense-making and the interaction between human and machine. Knowledge Discovery from Data (KDD), deals mainly with machine intelligence, and with the development of algorithms for automatic and interactive data mining [1].

II) A formal short answer:

Deep Learning is part of  Machine Learning  is part of Artificial Intelligence

DL  \subset ML  \subset AI

This follows the popular Deep Learning book by Ian Goodfellow, Yoshua Bengio and Aaron Courville published by MIT Press 2016 [2]:
http://www.deeplearningbook.org/contents/intro.html

and here is the explanation:

III) A more elaborated answer:

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the field working on understanding intelligence. The motto of Google Deep Mind is “understand intelligence – then understand everything else” (Demis Hassabis) – consequently the study of human intelligence is of utmost importance for understanding machine intelligence. The long-term goal of AI is in general intelligence (“strong AI”). AI has a strong connection to cognitive science and is a very old scientific field. After a first hype between 1950 and 1980 and a following AI-winter, it has regained hype status because of the practical success made by machine learning and particularly by the success of deep learning very recently (although going back to the early days of AI, e.g. [3]. Recently the DARPA described it well (DARPA Perspective on Artificial Intelligence by John LAUNCHBURY – excellent video, I highly recommend my students to watch it:

According to DARPA there are three waves of AI: the first wave as kind of a programmed ability to process information, i.e. engineers handcraft a set of rules to represent knowledge in well-defined domains. The structure of this knowledge is defined by human experts and specifics in the domain are explored by computers. The second wave of AI is the success of statistical learning, i.e. engineers create statistical models for specific problem domains and train them, preferably on very big data sets. (BTW: John LAUNCHBURY emphasizes the importance of geometric models for machine learning, e.g. manifolds in topological data analysis). Currently neural networks (deep learning) show tremendously interesting successes (see e.g. a recent work from our own group [4]. The future third wave will have to focus on explainable ai, i.e. contextual adaptation, and make models able to explain how an algorithms came to a decision (see my post on transparceny and trust in machine learning and our recent paper [7], and see our iML project page). In essence ALL three waves are necessary in the future and the combination of various methods promise success!

Machine Learning (ML) is a very practical field and deals with applying artificial intelligence for the design and development of algorithms that can learn from data, to gain knowledge from experience and improve their learning behaviour over time – for more details please refer to [5].

Whilst AI is the broader fundament and encompasses all underlying scientific theories of human learning vs. machine learning, ML itself is a very practical field with uncountable practical applications – the introduction by Sebastian Thrun (Stanford) and Katie Malone (Moderator at Linear Digressions) brings this beautiful to the point and makes it important how important machine learning is for business:

 

Deep Learning (DL) is one methodological family of ML based on, e.g. artificial neural networks (ANN), deep belief networks, recurrent neural networks, or to give a precise example of a feed forward ANN: the multilayer perceptron (MLP), which is a very simple mathematical function mapping a set of input data to output data. The concept behind is representations learning by introducing other representations that are expressed in terms of simpler representations. Maybe, this is how our brain works [6], but we do not know yet.

A nice example is the recognition of a cat (at 2m11s):

However, this immediately let us understand the huge shortcomings of these approaches: While these algorithms nicely recognize a cat, they cannot explain why it is a cat. The algorithm is unable to explain why it come to this conclusion. Consequently, the next level of machine learning and artificial intelligence is in explainable AI, see transparency.

A final note to my students: computational intelligence (you may call it either Artificial Intelligence (AI) or Machine Learning (ML) may help to solve problems, particularly in areas where humans have limited capacities (e.g. in high dimensional spaces, large numbers, big data, etc.); however, we must acknowledge that the problem-solving capacity of the human mind is still unbeaten in certain aspects (e.g. in the lower dimensions, little data, complex problems, etc.). A strategic aim to find solutions for data intensive problems is effectively the combination of our two areas: Human–Computer Interaction (HCI) and Knowledge Discovery (KDD).

A proverb attributed perhaps incorrectly to Albert Einstein (many proverbs are attributed to famous persons to make them appealing) illustrates this perfectly: “Computers are incredibly fast, accurate, but stupid. Humans are incredibly slow, inaccurate, but brilliant. Together they may be powerful beyond imagination”. Consequently, the novel approach to combine HCI & KDD in order to enhance human intelligence by computational intelligence fits perfectly to AI and ML together [1].

References:

[1]          Holzinger, A. 2013. Human–Computer Interaction and Knowledge Discovery (HCI-KDD): What is the benefit of bringing those two fields to work together? In: Cuzzocrea, Alfredo, Kittl, Christian, Simos, Dimitris E., Weippl, Edgar & Xu, Lida (eds.) Multidisciplinary Research and Practice for Information Systems, Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science LNCS 8127. Heidelberg, Berlin, New York: Springer, pp. 319-328, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40511-2_22.

[2]          Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y. & Courville, A. 2016. Deep Learning, Cambridge (MA), MIT Press.

[3]          Mcculloch, W. S. & Pitts, W. 1943. A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 5, (4), 115-133, doi:10.1007/BF02459570.

[4]          Singh, D., Merdivan, E., Psychoula, I., Kropf, J., Hanke, S., Geist, M. & Holzinger, A. 2017. Human Activity Recognition Using Recurrent Neural Networks. In: Holzinger, Andreas, Kieseberg, Peter, Tjoa, A. Min & Weippl, Edgar (eds.) Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction: Lecture Notes in Computer Science LNCS 10410. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 267-274, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-66808-6_18.

[5]          Holzinger, A. 2017. Introduction to Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction (MAKE). Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction, 1, (1), 1-20, doi:10.3390/make1010001.

[6]          Hinton, G. E. & Shallice, T. 1991. Lesioning an attractor network: Investigations of acquired dyslexia. Psychological review, 98, (1), 74.

[7]   Holzinger, A., Plass, M., Holzinger, K., Crisan, G.C., Pintea, C.-M. & Palade, V. 2017. A glass-box interactive machine learning approach for solving NP-hard problems with the human-in-the-loop. arXiv:1708.01104.

Digital Pathology: The world’s fastest whole slide scanner is now working in Graz

26.10.2017. Today, Prof. Kurt Zatloukal and his group together with the digital pathology team of 3DHISTECH, our industrial partner, completed the installation of the new generation panoramic P1000 scanner. The world’s fastest whole slide image scanner (WSI) is now located in Graz. The current scanner outperforms current state-of-the-art systems by a factor 6, which provides enormous opportunities for our MAKEpatho project.

Digital Pathology and Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning

Digital pathology [1] is not just the transformation of the classical microscopic analysis of histopathological slides by pathologists to a digital visualization. Digital Pathology is an innovation that will dramatically change medical workflows in the coming years. In the center is Whole Slide Imaging (WSI), but the true added value will result from a combination of heterogenous data sources. This will generate a new kind of information not yet available today. Much information is hidden in arbitrarily high dimensional spaces and not accessible to a human. Consequently, we need novel approaches from artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) (see definition) in Digital Pathology [2]. The goal is to gain knowledge from this information, which is not yet available and not exploited to date [3].

Digital Pathology chances

Major changes enabled by digital pathology include the improvement of medical decision making, new chances for education and research, and the globalization of diagnostic services. The latter allows bringing the top-level expertise essentially to any patient in the world by the use of the Internet/Web. This will also generate totally new business models for  worldwide diagnostic services. Furthermore, by using AI/ML we can make new information of images accessible and quantifiable (e.g. through geometrical approaches and machine learning),  which is not yet available in current diagnostics. Another effect will be that digital pathology and machine learning will change the education and training systems, which will be an urgently needed solution to address the global shortage of medical specialists. While the digitalization is called Pathology 2.0 [4] we envision a Pathology 4.0 – and here explainable-AI will become important.

3DHISTECH

3DHISTECH Ltd. (the name is derived from „Three-dimensional Histological Technologies”) is a leading company, developing high-performance hardware and software products for digital pathology since 1996. As the first European manufacturer, 3DHISTECH is one of the market leaders in the world with more than 1500 sold systems. Being one of the pioneers in this field, 3DHISTECH develops and manufactures high speed digital slide scanners that create high quality bright field and fluorescent digital slides, digital histology software and tissue microarray machinery. 3DHISTECH’s aim is to fully digitalize the traditional pathology workflow so that it can adapt to the ever growing demands of healthcare today. Furthermore, educational programs are also organized to help pathologists learn and master these new technologies easier.

[1]  Shaimaa Al‐Janabi, Andre Huisman & Paul J. Van Diest (2012). Digital pathology: current status and future perspectives. Histopathology, 61, (1), 1-9, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2559.2011.03814.x.

[2] Anant Madabhushi & George Lee (2016). Image analysis and machine learning in digital pathology: Challenges and opportunities. Medical Image Analysis, 33, 170-175, doi:10.1016/j.media.2016.06.037.

[3]  Andreas Holzinger, Bernd Malle, Peter Kieseberg, Peter M. Roth, Heimo Müller, Robert Reihs & Kurt Zatloukal (2017). Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction in Digital Pathology needs an integrative approach. In: Springer Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence Volume LNAI 10344. Cham: Springer International, pp. 13-50. 10.1007/978-3-319-69775-8_2  [pdf-preprint available here]

[4]  Nikolas Stathonikos, Mitko Veta, André Huisman & Paul J Van Diest (2013). Going fully digital: Perspective of a Dutch academic pathology lab. Journal of pathology informatics, 4. doi:  10.4103/2153-3539.114206

[5] Francesca Demichelis, Mattia Barbareschi, P Dalla Palma & S Forti 2002. The virtual case: a new method to completely digitize cytological and histological slides. Virchows Archiv, 441, (2), 159-164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-001-0561-1

[6] Marcus Bloice, Klaus-Martin Simonic & Andreas Holzinger 2013. On the usage of health records for the design of virtual patients: a systematic review. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 13, (1), 103, doi:10.1186/1472-6947-13-103.

[7] http://www.3dhistech.com

[8]  http://pathologie.medunigraz.at/forschung/forschungslabor-fuer-experimentelle-zellforschung-und-onkologie

Mini Glossary:

Digital Pathology = is not only the conversion of histopathological slides into a digital image (WSI) that can be uploaded to a computer for storage and viewing, but a complete new medical work procedure (from Pathology 2.0 to Pathology 4.0) – the basis is Virtual Microscopy.

Explainability = motivated due to lacking transparency of black-box approaches, which do not foster trust and acceptance of AI generally and ML specifically among end-users. Rising legal and privacy aspects, e.g. with the new European General Data Protection Regulations (which come into effect in May 2018) will make black-box approaches difficult to use, because they often are not able to explain why a decision has been made (see explainable AI).

Explainable AI = raising legal and ethical aspects make it mandatory to enable a human to understand why a machine decision has been made, i.e. to make machine decisions re-traceable and to explain why a decision has been made [see Wikipedia on Explainable Artificial Intelligence] (Note: that does not mean that it is always necessary to explain everything and all – but to be able to explain it if necessary – e.g. for general understanding, for teaching, for learning, for research – or in court!)

Machine Aided Pathology = is the management, discovery and extraction of knowledge from a virtual case, driven by advances of digital pathology supported by feature detection and classification algorithms.

Virtual Case = the set of all histopathological slides of a case together with meta data from the macro pathological diagnosis [5]

Virtual microscopy = not only viewing of slides on a computer screen over a network, it can be enhanced by supporting the pathologist with equivalent optical resolution and magnification of a microscope whilst changing  the magnification; machine learning and ai methods can help to extract new knowlege out of the image data

Virtual Patient = has very different definitions (see [6]), we define it as a model of electronic records (images, reports, *omics) for studying e.g. diseases.

WSI = Whole Slide Image, a.k.a. virtual slide, is a digitized histopathology glass slide that has been created on a slide scanner and represents a high-resolution volume data cube which can be handled via a virtual microscope and most of all where methods from artificial intelligence generally, and interactive machine learning specifically, together with methods from topological data analysis, can make information accessible to a human pathologists, which would otherwise be hidden.

WSS = Whole Slide Scanner is the machinery for taking WSI including the hardware and the software for creating a WSI.

Transparency & Trust in Machine Learning: Making AI interpretable and explainable

A huge motivation for us in continuing to study interactive Machine Learning (iML) [1] – with a human in the loop [2] (see our project page) is that modern deep learning models are often considered to be “black-boxes” [3]. A further drawback is that such models have no explicit declarative knowledge representation, hence have difficulty in generating the required explanatory structures – which considerably limits the achievement of their full potential [4].

Even if we understand the mathematical theories behind the machine model it is still complicated to get insight into the internal working of that model, hence black box models are lacking transparency, consequently we raise the question: “Can we trust our results?”

In fact: “Can we explain how and why a result was achieved?” A classic example is the question “Which objects are similar?”, but an even more interesting question would be to answer “Why are those objects similar?”

We believe that there is growing demand in machine learning approaches, which are not only well performing, but transparent, interpretable and trustworthy. We are currently working on methods and models to reenact the machine decision-making process, to reproduce and to comprehend the learning and knowledge extraction process. This is important, because for decision support it is necessary to understand the causality of learned representations [5], [6]. If human intelligence is complemented by machine learning and at least in some cases even overruled, humans must still be able to understand, and most of all to be able to interactively influence the machine decision process. This needs context awareness and sensemaking to close the gap between human thinking and machine “thinking”.

A huge motivation for this approach are rising legal and privacy aspects, e.g. with the new European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR and ISO/IEC 27001) entering into force on May, 25, 2018, will make black-box approaches difficult to use in business, because they are not able to explain why a decision has been made.

This will stimulate research in this area with the goal of making decisions interpretable, comprehensible and reproducible. On the example of health informatics this is not only useful for machine learning research, and for clinical decision making, but at the same time a big asset for the training of medical students.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (Regulation (EU) 2016/679) is a regulation by which the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission intend to strengthen and unify data protection for all individuals within the European Union (EU). It also addresses the export of personal data outside of the European Union (this will affect data-centric projects between the EU and e.g. the US). The GDPR aims primarily to give control back to citizens and residents over their personal data and to simplify the regulatory environment for international business by unifying the regulation within the EU. The GDPR replaces the data protection Directive 95/46/EC) of 1995. The regulation was adopted on 27 April 2016 and becomes enforceable from 25 May 2018 after now a two-year transition period and, unlike a directive, it does not require national governments to pass any enabling legislation, and is thus directly binding – which affects practically all data-driven businesses and particularly machine learning and AI technology Here to note is that the “right to be forgotten” [7] established by the European Court of Justice has been extended to become a “right of erasure”; it will no longer be sufficient to remove a person’s data from search results when requested to do so, data controllers must now erase that data. However, if the data is encrypted, it may be sufficient to destroy the encryption keys rather than go through the prolonged process of ensuring that the data has been fully erased [8].

A recent, and very interesting discussion with Daniel S. WELD (Artificial Intelligence, Crowdsourcing, Information Extraction) on Explainable AI can be found here:

The interview in essence brings out that most machine learning models are very complicated: deep neural networks operate incredibly quickly, considering thousands of possibilities in seconds before making decisions and Dan Weld points out: “The human brain simply can’t keep up” – and pointed at the example when AlphaGo made an unexpected decision: It is not possible to understand why the algorithm made exactly that choice. Of course this may not be critical in a game – no one gets hurt; however, deploying intelligent machines that we can not understand could set a dangerous precedent in e.g. in our domain: health informatics. According to Dan Weld, understanding and trusting machines is “the key problem to solve” in AI safety, security, data protection and privacy, and it is urgently necessary. He further explains, “Since machine learning is nowadays at the core of pretty much every AI success story, it’s really important for us to be able to understand what is it that the machine learned.” In case a machine learning system is confronted with a “known unknown,” it may recognize its uncertainty with the situation in the given context. However, when it encounters an unknown unknown, it won’t even recognize that this is an uncertain situation: the system will have extremely high confidence that its result is correct – but it still will be wrong, and Dan pointed on the example of classifiers “trained on data that had some regularity in it that’s not reflected in the real world” – which is a problem of having little data or even no available training data (see [1]) – the problem of “unknown unknowns” is definitely underestimated in the traditional AI community. Governments and businesses can’t afford to deploy highly intelligent AI systems that make unexpected, harmful decisions, especially if these systems are in safety critical environments.

 

References:

[1]          Holzinger, A. 2016. Interactive Machine Learning for Health Informatics: When do we need the human-in-the-loop? Brain Informatics, 3, (2), 119-131, doi:10.1007/s40708-016-0042-6.

[2]          Holzinger, A., Plass, M., Holzinger, K., Crisan, G. C., Pintea, C.-M. & Palade, V. 2017. A glass-box interactive machine learning approach for solving NP-hard problems with the human-in-the-loop. arXiv:1708.01104.

[3]          Lipton, Z. C. 2016. The mythos of model interpretability. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.03490.

[4]          Bologna, G. & Hayashi, Y. 2017. Characterization of Symbolic Rules Embedded in Deep DIMLP Networks: A Challenge to Transparency of Deep Learning. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing Research, 7, (4), 265-286, doi:10.1515/jaiscr-2017-0019.

[5]          Pearl, J. 2009. Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference (2nd Edition), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

[6]          Gershman, S. J., Horvitz, E. J. & Tenenbaum, J. B. 2015. Computational rationality: A converging paradigm for intelligence in brains, minds, and machines. Science, 349, (6245), 273-278, doi:10.1126/science.aac6076.

[7]          Malle, B., Kieseberg, P., Schrittwieser, S. & Holzinger, A. 2016. Privacy Aware Machine Learning and the “Right to be Forgotten”. ERCIM News (special theme: machine learning), 107, (3), 22-23.

[8]          Kingston, J. 2017. Using artificial intelligence to support compliance with the general data protection regulation. Artificial Intelligence and Law, doi:10.1007/s10506-017-9206-9.

Links:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datenschutz-Grundverordnung

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:31995L0046

2016 ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning (WHI 2016), New York, NY

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/07/neon-prescription-or-rather-new.html

https://sites.google.com/site/nips2016interpretml

 

Interpretable Machine Learning Workshop

Andrew G Wilson, Jason Yosinski, Patrice Simard, Rich Caruana, William Herlands

https://nips.cc/Conferences/2017/Schedule?showEvent=8744

 

Journal “Artificial Intelligence and Law”

https://link.springer.com/journal/volumesAndIssues/10506

ISSN: 0924-8463 (Print) 1572-8382 (Online)

Mini Glossary:

AI = Artificial Intelligence, today interchangeably used together with Machine learning (ML) – those are highly interrelated but not the same

Causality = extends from Greek philosophy to todays neuropsychology; assumptions about the nature of causality may be shown to be functions of a previous event preceding a later event. A relevant reading on this is by Judea Pearl (2000 and 2009)

Explainability = upcoming fundamental topic within recent AI; answering e.g. why a decision has been made

Etiology = in medicine (many) factors coming together to cause an illness (see causality)

Interpretability = there is no formal technical definition yet, but it is considered as a prerequisite for trust

Transparency = opposite of opacity of black-box approaches, and connotes the ability to understand how a model works (that does not mean that it should always be understood, but that – in the case of necessity – it can be re-enacted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CD-MAKE machine learning and knowledge extraction

Marta Milo and Neil Lawrence in Reggio di Calabria at CD-MAKE 2017

The CD-MAKE 2017 in the context of the ARES conference series was a full success in beautiful Reggio di Calabria.

In the middle Marta Milo and Neil Lawrence the keynote speakers of CD-MAKE 2017, flanked by Francesco Buccafurri (on the right) and Andreas Holzinger

Transfer Learning to overcome catastrophic forgetting

In machine learning deep convolutional networks (deep learning) are very successful for solving particular problems [1] – at least when having many training samples. Great success has been made recently, e.g. in automatic game playing by AlphaGo (see the nature news here).  As fantastic these approaches are, it should be mentioned that deep learning has still serious limitations: they are black-box approaches, where it is currently difficult to explain how and why a result was achieved – see our recent work on glass-box approach [2], consequently lacking transparency and trust – issues which will become increasingly important in our data-centric world; they are demanding huge computational resources, and need enormous amounts of training data (often thousands, sometimes even millions of training samples) and standard approaches are poor at representing uncertainties which calls for Bayesian deep learning approaches [3]. Most of all, deep learning approaches are affected by an effect we call “catastrophic forgetting”.

What is catastrophic forgetting? One of the critical steps towards general artificial intelligence (human-level AI) is the ability to continually learn – similarly as we humans do: ongoing and continuous being capable of learning a new task B without forgetting how to perform an old task A. This seemingly trivial characteristic is not trivial for machine learning generally and deep learning specifically: McCloskey & Cohen already in 1989 [4] showed that neural networks have difficulties with this kind of transfer learning and coined the term catastrophic forgetting – and transfer learning is one attempt to overcoming it. Transfer learning is the ability to learn tasks permanently. Humans can do that very good – even very little children (refer to the work of Alison Gopnik, e.g. [5],  and at the bottom of this post). The synaptic consolidation in human brains may enable continual learning by reducing the plasticity of synapses that are vital to previously learned tasks ([6] and see a recent work on intelligent synapses for multi-task and transfer learning [7]). Based on these ideas the Google Deepmind Group around Demis Hassabis implemented a cool algorithm that performs a similar operation in artificial neural networks by constraining important parameters to stay close to their old values in their work on overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networks  (arXiv:1612.00796), [8]. As we know, a deep neural network consists of multiple layers of linear projections followed by element-wise non-linearities. Learning a task consists basically of adjusting the set of weights and biases θ of the linear projections, consequently, many configurations of θ will result in the same performance which is relevant for the so-called elastic weight consolidation (EWC): over-parametrization makes it likely that there is a solution for task B, θ ∗ B , that is close to the previously found solution for task A, θ ∗ A . While learning task B, EWC therefore protects the performance in task A by constraining the parameters to stay in a region of low error for task A centered around θ ∗ A. This constraint has been implemented as a quadratic penalty, and can therefore be imagined as a mechanical spring anchoring the parameters to the previous solution, hence the name elastic. In order to justify this choice of constraint and to define which weights are most important for a task, it is useful to consider neural network training from a probabilistic perspective. From this point of view, optimizing the parameters is tantamount to finding their most probable values given some data D. Interestingly, this can be computed as conditional probability p(θ|D) from the prior probability of the parameters p(θ) and the probability of the data p(D|θ) by: log p(θ|D) = log p(D|θ) + log p(θ) − log p(D).

Here exists and constantly emerge a lot of open and important research avenues which challenge the international machine learning community (see e.g. [9]).  The most interesting is what we don’t know yet – and the breaktrough machine learning approaches have not yet invented.

Andrew Y. Ng at the last NIPS 2016 conferene in Barcelona hold a tutorial where he emphasized the importance of transfer learning research and that “transfer learning will be the next driver of machine learning success” …
There is a wonderful post by Sebastian Ruder, see: http://knowledgeofficer.com/knowledge/46-transfer-learning-machine-learning-s-next-frontier

[1]          Yann LeCun, Yoshua Bengio & Geoffrey Hinton 2015. Deep learning. Nature, 521, (7553), 436-444, doi:10.1038/nature14539.

[2]          Andreas Holzinger, Markus Plass, Katharina Holzinger, Gloria Cerasela Crisan, Camelia-M. Pintea & Vasile Palade 2017. A glass-box interactive machine learning approach for solving NP-hard problems with the human-in-the-loop. arXiv:1708.01104.

[3]          Alex Kendall & Yarin Gal 2017. What Uncertainties Do We Need in Bayesian Deep Learning for Computer Vision? arXiv:1703.04977.

[4]          Michael Mccloskey & Neal J Cohen 1989. Catastrophic interference in connectionist networks: The sequential learning problem. In: Bower, G. H. (ed.) The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Volume 24. San Diego (CA): Academic Press, pp. 109-164.

[5]          Alison Gopnik, Clark Glymour, David M Sobel, Laura E Schulz, Tamar Kushnir & David Danks 2004. A theory of causal learning in children: causal maps and Bayes nets. Psychological review, 111, (1), 3.

[6]          Stefano Fusi, Patrick J Drew & Larry F Abbott 2005. Cascade models of synaptically stored memories. Neuron, 45, (4), 599-611. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2005.02.001

[7]          Friedemann Zenke, Ben Poole & Surya Ganguli. Continual Learning Through Synaptic Intelligence.  International Conference on Machine Learning, 2017. 3987-3995. PMLR 70:3987-3995

[8]          James Kirkpatrick, Razvan Pascanu, Neil Rabinowitz, Joel Veness, Guillaume Desjardins, Andrei A. Rusu, Kieran Milan, John Quan, Tiago Ramalho, Agnieszka Grabska-Barwinska, Demis Hassabis, Claudia Clopath, Dharshan Kumaran & Raia Hadsell 2017. Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114, (13), 3521-3526, doi:http://www.pnas.org/content/114/13/3521?tab=ds.

[9]          Ian J Goodfellow, Mehdi Mirza, Da Xiao, Aaron Courville & Yoshua Bengio 2015. An empirical investigation of catastrophic forgeting in gradient-based neural networks. arXiv:1312.6211v3.

Machine learning researchers should watch the videos by Alison Gopnik, e.g.:

Machine Learning & Knowledge Extraction (MAKE) Journal launched

Inaugural Editorial Paper published:

Holzinger, A. 2017. Introduction to Machine Learning & Knowledge Extraction (MAKE). Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction, 1, (1), 1-20, doi:10.3390/make1010001.

http://www.mdpi.com/2504-4990/1/1/1

Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction (MAKE) is an inter-disciplinary, cross-domain, peer-reviewed, scholarly open access journal to provide a platform to support the international machine learning community. It publishes original research articles, reviews, tutorials, research ideas, short notes and Special Issues that focus on machine learning and applications. Papers which deal with fundamental research questions to help reach a level of useable computational intelligence are very welcome.

Machine learning deals with understanding intelligence to design algorithms that can learn from data, gain knowledge from experience and improve their learning behaviour over time. The challenge is to extract relevant structural and/or temporal patterns (“knowledge”) from data, which is often hidden in high dimensional spaces,  thus not accessible to humans. Many application
domains, e.g., smart health, smart factory, etc. affect our daily life, e.g., recommender systems, speech recognition, autonomous driving, etc. The grand challenge is to understand the context in the real-world under uncertainty. Probabilistic inference can be of
great help here as the inverse probability allows to learn from data, to infer unknowns, and to make predictions to support decision making.

NOTE: To support the training of a new kind of machine learning graduates, the journal accepts peer-reviewed high-end tutorial papers, similar as the IEEE Signal Processing Magazine (SCI IF=9.654 !) is doing:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/aboutJournal.jsp?punumber=79#AimsScope

Call for Papers: Open Data for Discovery Science (due to July, 31, 2017)

The Journal BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making (SCI IF (2015): 2,042)
invites to submit to a new thematic series on open data for discovery science

https://bmcmedinformdecismak.biomedcentral.com/articles/collections/odds

Note: Excellent submissions to the IFIP Cross Domain Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery (CD-MAKE), (Submission due to May, 15, 2017) relevant to the topics described below, will be invited to expand their work into this thematic series:
The use of open data for discovery science has gained much attention recently as its full potential is unfolding and being explored in projects spanning all areas of healthcare research. A plethora of data sets are now available thanks to drives to make data universally accessible and usable for discovery science. However, with these advances come inherent challenges with the processing and management of ever expanding data sources. The computational and informatics tools and methods currently used in most investigational settings are often labor intensive and rely upon technologies that have not been designed to scale and support reasoning across multi-dimensional data resources. In addition, there are many challenges associated with the storage and responsible use of open data, particularly medical data, such as privacy, data protection, safety, information security and fair use of the data. There are therefore significant demands from the research community for the development of data management and analytic tools supporting heterogeneous analytic workflows and open data sources. Effective anonymisation tools are also of paramount importance to protect data security whilst preserving the usability of the data.

The purpose of this thematic series is to bring together articles reporting advances in the use of open data including the following:

  • The development of tools and methods targeting the reproducible and rigorous use of open data for discovery science, including but not limited to: syntactic and semantic standards, platforms for data sharing and discovery, and computational workflow orchestration technologies that enable the creation of data analytics, machine learning and knowledge extraction pipelines.
  • Practical approaches for the automated and/or semi-automated harmonization, integration, analysis, and presentation of data products to enable hypothesis discovery or testing.
  • Theoretical and practical approaches for solutions to make use of interactive machine learning to put a human-in-the-loop, answering questions including: could human intelligence lead to general heuristics that we can use to improve heuristics?
  • Frameworks for the application of open data in hypothesis generation and testing in projects spanning translational, clinical, and population health research.
  • Applied studies that demonstrate the value of using open data either as a primary or as an enriching source of information for the purposes of hypothesis generation/testing or for data-driven decision making in the research, clinical, and/or population health environments.
  • Privacy preserving machine learning and knowledge extraction algorithms that can enable the sharing of previously “privileged” data types as open data.
  • Evaluation and benchmarking methodologies, methods and tools that can be used to demonstrate the impact of results generated through the primary or secondary use of open data.
  • Socio-cultural, usability, acceptance, ethical and policy issues and frameworks relevant to the sharing, use, and dissemination of information and knowledge derived from the analysis of open data.

Submission is open to everyone, and all submitted manuscripts will be peer-reviewed through the standard BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making review process. Manuscripts should be formatted according to the submission guidelines and submitted via the online submission system. Please indicate clearly in the covering letter that the manuscript is to be considered for the ‘Open data for discovery science’ collection. The deadline for submissions will be 31 July 2017.

For further information, please email the editors of the thematic series:
Andreas HOLZINGER a.holzinger@hci-kdd.org,
Philip PAYNE prpayne@wustl.edu ,or the BMC in-house editor
Emma COOKSON at emma.cookson@biomedcentral.com

Link to the IFIP Cross-Domain Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction (CD-MAKE):
https://cd-make.net

Federated Collaborative Machine Learning

The Google Research Group [1] is always doing awesome stuff, the most recent one is on Federated Learning [2], which enables e.g. smart phones (of course any computational device, and maybe later all internet-of-things, intelligent sensors in either smart hospitals or in smart factories etc.) to collaboratively learn a shared representation model, whilst keeping all the training data on the local devices, decoupling the ability to do machine learning from the need to store the data centralized in the cloud. This goes beyond the use of local models that make predictions on mobile devices (like the Mobile Vision API and On-Device Smart Reply) by bringing model training to the device as well – which is great. The problem with standard approaches is that you always need centralized training data – either on your USB-stick, as the medical doctors do, or in a sophisticated centralized data center.

The basic idea is that the mobile device downloads the current modela and subsequently improves it by learning from data on the respective device, and then summarizes the changes as a small focused update. The remarkable detail is that only this update to the model is sent to the cloud (yes, here privacy, data protection safety and security is challenged see e.g. [3] – but this is much easier to do with this small data – as when you would do it with the raw data – think for example on patient data), where it is immediately averaged with other devicer updates to improve the shared model. All the training data remains on the local devices, and no individual updates are stored in the cloud.

The Google Group recently solved a lot of algorithmic and technical challenges. In a typical machine learning system, an optimization algorithm e.g. Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) [4] runs on a large dataset partitioned homogeneously across servers in the cloud. Such highly iterative algorithms require low-latency, high-throughput connections to the training data. But in the Federated Learning setting, the data is distributed across millions of devices in a highly uneven fashion. In addition, these devices have significantly higher-latency, lower-throughput connections and are only intermittently available for training.

This calls for a lot of further investigations with interactive Machine Learning (iML) bringing the human-into-the loop, i.e. making use of human cognitive abilities. This can be of particular interest to solve problems, where learning algorithms suffer due to insufficient training samples (rare events, single events), where we deal with complex data and/or computationally hard problems. For example, “doctors-in-the-loop” can help with their long-term experience and heursitic knowledge to solve problems which otherwise would remain NP-hard [5, 6]. A further step is with many humans-in-the-loop: Such collaborative interactive Machine Learning (ciML) can help in many application areas and domains, e.g. in in health informatics (smart hospital) or in industrial applications (smart factory) [7].

Read the original article, posted on April, 6, 2017,  here:
https://research.googleblog.com/2017/04/federated-learning-collaborative.html

[1] https://research.googleblog.com

[2] NIPS Workshop on Private Multi-Party Machine Learning, Barcelona, December, 9, 2016, https://pmpml.github.io/PMPML16/

[3] Bonawitz, K., Ivanov, V., Kreuter, B., Marcedone, A., Mcmahan, H. B., Patel, S., Ramage, D., Segal, A. & Seth, K. 2016. Practical Secure Aggregation for Federated Learning on User-Held Data. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.04482.

[4] Bottou, L. 2010. Large-scale machine learning with stochastic gradient descent. Proceedings of COMPSTAT’2010. Springer, pp. 177-186. doi:10.1007/978-3-7908-2604-3_16  (N.B.: 836 citations as of 08.04.2017)

[5] Holzinger, A. 2016. Interactive Machine Learning for Health Informatics: When do we need the human-in-the-loop? Brain Informatics, 3, (2), 119-131, doi:10.1007/s40708-016-0042-6

[6] Holzinger, A., Plass, M., Holzinger, K., Crisan, G., Pintea, C. & Palade, V. 2016. Towards interactive Machine Learning (iML): Applying Ant Colony Algorithms to solve the Traveling Salesman Problem with the Human-in-the-Loop approach. In: Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science LNCS 9817. Heidelberg, Berlin, New York: Springer, pp. 81-95, [pdf]

[7] Robert, S., Büttner, S., Röcker, C. & Holzinger, A. 2016. Reasoning Under Uncertainty: Towards Collaborative Interactive Machine Learning. In: Machine Learning for Health Informatics: Lecture Notes in Artifical Intelligence LNAI 9605. Springer, pp. 357-376, [pdf]

Image source: https://research.googleblog.com/2017/04/federated-learning-collaborative.html

 

Integrated interactomes and pathways in precision medicine by Igor Jurisica, Toronto

Machine learning is the fastest growing field in computer science, and Health Informatics is amongst the greatest application challenges, providing benefits in improved medical diagnoses, disease analyses, and pharmaceutical development – towards future precision medicine.

Talk announcement: Friday, 12th May, 2017, 10:00, Seminaraum 137, Parterre, Inffeldgasse 16c

Integrated interactomes and pathways in precision medicine

by Igor Jurisica, University of Toronto and Princess Margaret Cancer Center Toronto

Abstract: Fathoming cancer and other complex disease development processes requires systematically integrating diverse types of information, including multiple high-throughput datasets and diverse annotations. This comprehensive and integrative analysis will lead to data-driven precision medicine, and in turn will help us to develop new hypotheses, and answer complex questions such as what factors cause disease; which patients are at high risk; will patients respond to a given treatment; how to rationally select a combination therapy to individual patient, etc.
Thousands of potentially important proteins remain poorly characterized. Computational biology methods, including machine learning, knowledge extraction, data mining and visualization, can help to fill this gap with accurate predictions, making disease modeling more comprehensive. Intertwining computational prediction and modeling with biological experiments will lead to more useful findings faster and more economically.

Short Bio: Igor Jurisica is Tier I Canada Research Chair in Integrative Cancer Informatics, Senior Scientist at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Professor at University of Toronto and Visiting Scientist at IBM CAS. He is also an Adjunct Professor at the School of Computing, Pathology and Molecular Medicine at Queen’s University, Computer Science at York University, scientist at the Institute of Neuroimmunology, Slovak Academy of Sciences and an Honorary Professor at Shanghai Jiao Tong University in China. Since 2015, he has also served as Chief Scientist at the Creative Destruction Lab, Rotman School of Management. Igor has published extensively on data mining, visualization and cancer informatics, including multiple papers in Science, Nature, Nature Medicine, Nature Methods, Journal of Clinical Oncology, and received over 9,960 citations since 2012. He has been included in Thomson Reuters 2016, 2015 & 2014 list of Highly Cited Researchers, and The World’s Most Influential Scientific Minds: 2015 & 2014 Reports.

Jurisica Lab, IBM Life Sciences Discovery Center: http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~juris/

Canada Tier I Research Chair: http://www.chairs-chaires.gc.ca/chairholders-titulaires/profile-eng.aspx?profileId=2347

On Nutrigenomics [1]: http://www.uhn.ca/corporate/News/Pages/Igor_Jurisica_talks_nutrigenomics.aspx

[1] Nutrigenomics tries to define the causality or relationship between specific nutrients and specific nutrient regimes (diets) on human health. The underlying idea is in personalized nutrition based on the *omics background, which may help to foster personal dietrary recommendations. Ultimately, nutrigenomics will allow effective dietary-intervention strategies to recover normal homeostasis and to prevent diet-related diseases, see: Muller, M. & Kersten, S. 2003. Nutrigenomics: goals and strategies. Nature Reviews Genetics, 4, (4), 315-322.

What is machine learning?

Many services of our every day life rely meanwhile on machine learning. Machine learning is a very practical field and provides powerful technologies that allows machines (i.e. computers) to learn from prior data, to extract knowledge, to generalize and to make predictions – similar as we humans can do (see the MAKE intro). There is a very nice and highly recommendable info graphic available by the Royal Society [1]. This includes also an interactive quiz, which can be found here:

Royal Society Infographic “What is machine learning?”

This is part of a larger info campaign about machine learning from the Royal Society:

https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/machine-learning/

[1] The Royal Society was formed by a group of natural scientists influenced by Francis BACON (1561-1626).  The first ‘learned society’ meeting on 28 November 1660 followed a lecture at Gresham College by Christopher WREN. Joined by Robert BOYLE and John WILKINS and others, the group received royal approval by King Charles II (1630-1685) in 1663 and was known since as ‘The Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge’.

Today the Royal Society is a registered charity and the governing body of the Society is its Council and its members are elected by and from the Fellowship. Important to mention is that the Royal Society has an international character: “Science is an inherently international activity. The Society’s aim  is to reinforce the importance of science to build partnerships between nations, promote international relations and science’s role in culture and society”