MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2607640115

Latent Class model using discriminative restricted Boltzmann Machine

2017· article· en· W2607640115 sur OpenAlexaff
Melvin Wong, Bilal Farooq, Guillaume-Alexandre Bilodeau

Notice bibliographique

RevuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueHuman Mobility and Location-Based Analysis
Établissements canadiensPolytechnique Montréal
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDiscriminative modelClass (philosophy)Computer scienceArtificial intelligence
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction We have seen numerous applications of semi-supervised learning algorithms on big data analysis to perform classification and prediction tasks, however there are hardly any studies on discrete choice models utilizing these machine learning concepts. Semi-supervised learning with generative models is an interesting strategy due to the proliferation of big data and on line services providing large volumes of data. They provide a way to learn the underlying structure of the data with little guidance from a priori classes or choice labels. In discrete choice literature, we have also seen similar trends using data obtained from rich, streaming data in travel demand analysis (Toole et al., 2015; Vij and Shankari, 2015), but such cases are mainly for offline analysis. Therefore, we suggest that new research directions in choice modeling have to place more emphasis on the semi-supervised learning approach for online demand analysis, to be able to replicate similar successful machine learning applications seen in big data analysis. In this paper, we propose a novel modeling methodology in discrete choice analysis that utilize generative modeling and efficient training algorithms from machine learning to describe a latent class choice model. To our knowledge, this has not been done before in travel choice modeling literature. Our study hopes to provide new clues for machine learning algorithms in choice modeling for greater value towards the behavior interpretation and understanding the complex phenomena in the choice process. This is even more essential with the recently emerging intelligent transportation market (Vij and Walker, 2016; Anselmetti, 2016). Background Semi-supervised learning has been extremely successful in areas such as speech and word generation and recommender systems due to breakthroughs in advanced generative models and training methods. In particular, we have seen semi-supervised learning methods in machine learning competitions that use large sparsely labeled data volumes, for example, the Netflix Prize Competition or in synthetic music generation (Salakhutdinov et al. 2007; Boulanger-Lewandowski et al. 2012). Much of the success have been contributed by the development of the semi-supervised learning methods in restricted Boltzmann Machine (RBM) and efficient training algorithms such as stochastic gradient decent (SGD) or contrastive divergence (CD) (Hinton, 2002). Discriminative RBM is an extension of the generative modeling based RBM with classification that can be used for probabilistic decision making or predicting future observations based on past data (Larochelle and Bengio, 2008; Larochelle et al. 2012). A generative model has the potential to learn the individual variations entirely from the data without supervision. It can uncover the latent structure better than traditional discrete choice models because it is a full probabilistic model of all variables (i.e. it estimates the joint distribution of the input variables and output choices), whereas a conditional probabilistic model such as a mixed logit would normally assume an arbitrary underlying distribution (normal, log-normal, triangle etc.) for the input random variables, which is not particularly accurate in modeling realistic representations. Discriminative models used in discrete choice analysis does not attempt to uncover the underlying probability distributions, however they are much faster to compute than generative models. Methodology The graphical model is shown in Figure 1 is a single layer discriminative RBM which models the relation between the observed “visible” inputs, output choices and “hidden” classes. A predetermined number of hidden units will represent the different latent classes and are parameterized by a weight factor and constant. The RBM is characterized by an energy based function (Larochelle and Bengio, 2008) which is another similar term used for the choice utility function. The probability of each choice is the multinomial logit of the energy function. The contrastive divergence learning algorithm is a fast and efficient sampling based optimization that relies on the gradient approximation of the maximum log-likelihood. We start close to the data distribution and update the parameters after a small number of steps which can result in good parameter estimates (Hinton, 2002). This is the predominant training methodology for RBM models in literature. Case Study In this study we present a discriminative RBM choice model and compare its performance with an operational level dynamic latent class mixed logit next link direction choice model that we had developed in our previous research work on the same dataset. The dataset consists of GPS location, time, availability of facilities and hourly weather data. The choice is defined by the next link direction over a series of links forming a trajectory shown in Figure 2. Then we generate new synthetic representations of the input data from the model and forecast the next step choices from these samples. Finally, we compare the accuracy of simulated choices against our observed data. Our previous study has shown that our discrete choice analysis approach can yield a maximum of 85% choice prediction accuracy. Semi-supervised learning methods in literature often achieve higher than 90% in most cases, therefore we hypothesize that with similar approach, we should obtain much better results. References Toole, J.L., Colak, S., Sturt, B., Alexander, L.P., Evsukoff, A. and Gonzalez, M.C., 2015. The path most traveled: Travel demand estimation using big data resources. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies , 58 , pp.162-177. Vij, A. and Shankari, K., 2015. When is big data big enough? Implications of using GPS-based surveys for travel demand analysis. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies , 56 , pp.446-462. Vij, A. and Walker, J.L., 2016. How, when and why integrated choice and latent variable models are latently useful. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological , 90 , pp.192-217. Anselmetti, R., 2016. The Autonomous Vehicle: End of the Road, or the Beginning of A New Era?: Concept and Challenges of a Disruptive Innovation within the Automotive Industry. Masters Thesis, KTH, School of Industrial Engineering and Management, Entrepreneurship and innovation. Salakhutdinov, R., Mnih, A. and Hinton, G., 2007, June. Restricted Boltzmann machines for collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Machine learning (pp. 791-798). ACM. Boulanger-Lewandowski, N., Bengio, Y. and Vincent, P., 2012. Modeling temporal dependencies in high-dimensional sequences: Application to polyphonic music generation and transcription. arXiv preprint arXiv:1206.6392 . Hinton, G.E., 2002. Training products of experts by minimizing contrastive divergence. Neural computation , 14 (8), pp.1771-1800. Larochelle, H. and Bengio, Y., 2008. Classification using discriminative restricted Boltzmann machines. In Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learning (pp. 536-543). ACM. Larochelle, H., Mandel, M., Pascanu, R. and Bengio, Y., 2012. Learning algorithms for the classification restricted boltzmann machine. Journal of Machine Learning Research , 13 (Mar), pp.643-669.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,692
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,036
Tête enseignante GPT0,306
Écart entre enseignants0,271 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSimulation ou modélisation
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal)Même sujetHuman Mobility and Location-Based AnalysisTravaux en français237 207