4 ms·
That rock you mention is where I work on my startup -- with money in mind. My main reason to do applied math is to apply it, to business, the money making kind
by graycat 10y ago
That rock you mention is where I work on
my startup -- with money in mind.
My main reason to do applied math is to
apply it, to business, the money making
kind.
Yes you have told me about Vapnik before,
but the rest I see, e.g., deep learning,
smells like tweaks on Breiman's CART. I
have a lot of respect for Breiman, maybe
more for his fellow student Neveu as they
were at Berkeley under Loeve.
I have a tough time taking Silicon Valley
seriously on anything serious about
machine learning -- new words for
statistical model building and estimation
but done with much more data.
In
Trevor Hastie, Robert Tibshirani, and
Jerome Friedman, The Elements of
Statistical Learning Data: Mining,
Inference, and Prediction, Second
Edition, Springer, 2008.
I find mention of Vapnik, mostly for
separating hyperplanes, and references
Vapnik, V. (1996). The Nature of
Statistical Learning Theory, Springer, New
York.
Vapnik, V. (1998). Statistical Learning
Theory, Wiley, New York.
Looking at Hastie, et al.,
which seems relatively elementary, I
wouldn't expect to find much on the
Kuhn-Tucker conditions or Glivenko
Cantelli.
In
Kevin P. Murphy, Machine Learning: A
Probabilistic Perspective, ISBN
978-0-262-01802-9, MIT Press, 2012.
I saw no mention of Vapnik.
In
Shai Shalev-Shwartz and Shai Ben-David,
Understanding Machine Learning From
Theory to Algorithms, 2014.
I see
Vapnik, V. (1992), Principles of risk
minimization for learning theory, in J. E.
Moody, S. J. Hanson & R. P. Lippmann, eds,
`Advances in Neural Information Processing
Systems 4', Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 831{838.
Vapnik, V. (1995), The Nature of
Statistical Learning Theory, Springer.
Vapnik, V. N. (1982), Estimation of
Dependences Based on Empirical Data,
Springer- Verlag.
Vapnik, V. N. (1998), Statistical Learning
Theory, Wiley.
Vapnik, V. N. & Chervonenkis, A. Y.
(1971), `On the uniform convergence of
relative frequencies of events to their
probabilities', Theory of Probability and
its applications XVI(2), 264{280.
Vapnik, V. N. & Chervonenkis, A. Y.
(1974), Theory of pattern recognition,
Nauka, Moscow. (In Russian).
Okay, that may be a first-cut list of what
to read on Vapnik.
Gee, machine learning and not from Silicon
Valley -- the second part is a step up!
Not from Pittsburgh either -- two steps
up!
Probabilistic and from Russia? More steps
up!
For more steps up, maybe some French or
Japanese could contribute?
For such things, I could take Bertsekas at
MIT seriously.
I'm deep into my startup; there I've done
my applied math derivations and written
the code.
It is true that I have some suspicions
that some old techniques tweaked a little
and maybe some newer techniques might
increase accuracy some, but I'm leaving
that on the back burner for now, avoiding
premature optimization.
But I'll index this post and not forget
about Vapnik.
- srean 10y agoIndeed, I can imagine (and still grossly underestimate) how frantically busy you would be. All the best for your startup. As I said, it was just a friendly ribbing. Given our interactions on HN I have come to gauge your taste a bit, hence my recommendations. Vapnik, V. N. (1998), Statistical Learning Theory is a tome. You probably would not have time to read this. I would say go with the other two books of his. They sort of summarize his body of early work. Again a lot of water has flown below the Vapnik bridge, but you will get a non-hyped view of what ML is about. Kevin P. Murphy, Machine Learning: A Probabilistic Perspective is also a hefty read, but its a good source and quite complementary to Vapnik's treatise. Kevin Murphy's book is about how to tractably model joint distribution of a (mostly discrete) set of random variables and draw inferences from them. So this is about smart and efficient ways to marginalize and condition and compress. Shai Shalev-Shwartz and Shai Ben-David, Understanding Machine Learning From Theory to Algorithms, 2014 This is also a great book. You will see a lot of KTC here but mostly within the framework of convexity and duality.