- Data-flow Graphing in Python (Matt Keeter) — not shared because data-flow graphing is sexy new hot topic that’s gonna set the world on fire (though, I bet that’d make Matt’s day), but because there are entire categories of engineering and operations migraines that are caused by not knowing where your data came from or goes to, when, how, and why. Remember Wirth’s “algorithms + data structures = programs”? Data flows seem like a different slice of “programs.” Perhaps “data flow + typos = programs”?
- Machine Learning for Sports and Real-time Predictions (Robohub) — podcast interview for your commute. Real time is gold.
- Japan’s Robot Hotel is Serious Business (Engadget) — hotel was architected to suit robots: For the porter robots, we designed the hotel to include wide paths.” Two paths slope around the hotel lobby: one inches up to the second floor, while another follows a gentle decline to guide first-floor guests (slowly, but with their baggage) all the way to their room. Makes sense: at Solid, I spoke to a chap working on robots for existing hotels, and there’s an entire engineering challenge in navigating an elevator that you wouldn’t believe.
- bokken — GUI to help open source reverse engineering for code.
"machine learning" entries
An interview with Andreas Mueller, on scikit-learn and usable machine learning software.
Mueller wears many hats at work. He is one of the key maintainers of the popular Python machine learning library scikit-learn. Holding a doctorate in computer vision from the University of Bonn in Germany, he currently works on open science at New York University’s Center for Data Science. He speaks at conferences around the world and has a fanbase of 5,000+ followers on Twitter and about as many reputation points on Stack Overflow. In other words, this man has got mad street cred. He started out doing pure math in academia, and has now achieved software developer cult idol status. Read more…
The O'Reilly Data Show Podcast: Poppy Crum explains that what matters is efficiency in identifying and emphasizing relevant data.
Like many data scientists, I’m excited about advances in large-scale machine learning, particularly recent success stories in computer vision and speech recognition. But I’m also cognizant of the fact that press coverage tends to inflate what current systems can do, and their similarities to how the brain works.
During the latest episode of the O’Reilly Data Show Podcast, I had a chance to speak with Poppy Crum, a neuroscientist who gave a well-received keynote at Strata + Hadoop World in San Jose. She leads a research group at Dolby Labs and teaches a popular course at Stanford on Neuroplasticity in Musical Gaming. I wanted to get her take on AI and virtual reality systems, and hear about her experience building a team of researchers from diverse disciplines.
Understanding neural function
While it can sometimes be nice to mimic nature, in the case of the brain, machine learning researchers recognize that understanding and identifying the essential neural processes is much more critical. A related example cited by machine learning researchers is flight: wing flapping and feathers aren’t critical, but an understanding of physics and aerodynamics is essential.
Crum and other neuroscience researchers express the same sentiment. She points out that a more meaningful goal should be to “extract and integrate relevant neural processing strategies when applicable, but also identify where there may be opportunities to be more efficient.”
The goal in technology shouldn’t be to build algorithms that mimic neural function. Rather, it’s to understand neural function. … The brain is basically, in many cases, a Rube Goldberg machine. We’ve got this limited set of evolutionary building blocks that we are able to use to get to a sort of very complex end state. We need to be able to extract when that’s relevant and integrate relevant neural processing strategies when it’s applicable. We also want to be able to identify that there are opportunities to be more efficient and more relevant. I think of it as table manners. You have to know all the rules before you can break them. That’s the big difference between being really cool or being a complete heathen. The same thing kind of exists in this area. How we get to the end state, we may be able to compromise, but we absolutely need to be thinking about what matters in neural function for perception. From my world, where we can’t compromise is on the output. I really feel like we need a lot more work in this area. Read more…
Using topology to uncover the shape of your data: An interview with Gurjeet Singh.
Get notified when our free report, “Future of Machine Intelligence: Perspectives from Leading Practitioners,” is available for download. The following interview is one of many that will be included in the report.
As part of our ongoing series of interviews surveying the frontiers of machine intelligence, I recently interviewed Gurjeet Singh. Singh is CEO and co-founder of Ayasdi, a company that leverages machine intelligence software to automate and accelerate discovery of data insights. Author of numerous patents and publications in top mathematics and computer science journals, Singh has developed key mathematical and machine learning algorithms for topological data analysis.
- The field of topology studies the mapping of one space into another through continuous deformations.
- Machine learning algorithms produce functional mappings from an input space to an output space and lend themselves to be understood using the formalisms of topology.
- A topological approach allows you to study data sets without assuming a shape beforehand and to combine various machine learning techniques while maintaining guarantees about the underlying shape of the data.
David Beyer: Let’s get started by talking about your background and how you got to where you are today.
Gurjeet Singh: I am a mathematician and a computer scientist, originally from India. I got my start in the field at Texas Instruments, building integrated software and performing digital design. While at TI, I got to work on a project using clusters of specialized chips called Digital Signal Processors (DSPs) to solve computationally hard math problems.
As an engineer by training, I had a visceral fear of advanced math. I didn’t want to be found out as a fake, so I enrolled in the Computational Math program at Stanford. There, I was able to apply some of my DSP work to solving partial differential equations and demonstrate that a fluid dynamics researcher need not buy a supercomputer anymore; they could just employ a cluster of DSPs to run the system. I then spent some time in mechanical engineering building similar GPU-based partial differential equation solvers for mechanical systems. Finally, I worked in Andrew Ng’s lab at Stanford, building a quadruped robot and programming it to learn to walk by itself. Read more…