1. Active Learning with Support Vector Machines
By: Estefan Ortiz

2. Outline Introduction Support Vector Machines
Machine Learning
Motivation for the need of Active Learning
Active and Passive learners
Formulation of Active learning
Support Vector Machines
Review of SVMs
Version Space
Reformulation of SVMs in Version Space
Active Learning using SVMs
Formulation of Active Learning using SVMs
Querying Algorithms
Implementation of Active Learning using SVMs
Data sets used
Results
Observations and lessons learned
Future research and suggested improvements
Conclusion

3. Machine Learning Machine learning Supervised training
The purpose of any type of machine learning is to be able teach a learner an underlying process from observed examples or data.
Supervised training
We are given training examples and their corresponding labels.
Our task is to teach the machine to recognize the correspondence between the data and the labels.
For classification this amounts to learning the classes associated to underlying data.
In training we present the learner with a feature vector and its corresponding label and ask it to adjust itself to learn the relationship.

4. Supervised Learning
What is assumed for this type of learning is that we have gathered a significant amount of data. (Feature vectors and their labels)
The data gathered is usually randomly sampled from some underlying probability distribution.
For each sample in our data set we are able to assign it a label.
Consider two situations:
Situation 1: We have limited resources for feature data and to gather large amounts of random samples may be too expensive.
Situation 2: We have access to a large quantity of unlabeled feature data. But to label the data will cost us something. Usually time or money

5. Motivation for Active Learning
Situation 1: Limited resources
This situation may come from a machine process in which it is too costly to halt the process to take large samples or measurements.
In this case we would like a method to choose the “best” set of samples such that when we train our learner will have a good set of training data.
Situation 2: Large amount of unlabeled data
This situation occurs in article classification to some topic.
There is a large database of articles, the task is for someone to read through and assign to each article a topic.
The cost is time and money to assign a topic to every article.
We would like to choose the “best” set of examples to be labeled so that our cost is low and our training set is good for our learner.
In both situations it would be beneficial to devise a way to choose the “best” examples for our training set.

6. Active and Passive Learners
Our previous methods of randomly choosing data samples to be presented to a learner for training is known as passive learning
The learner as no interaction (say so) in choosing the data that it receives for training.
An active learner is a learner that attempts to add training examples to its training set by gathering domain information.
The learner is able to interact with the data (domain) in order to choose appropriate examples.
Example:
Passive learner: Student that does not ask the instructor questions.
Active learner: Student that asks instructor questions to clarify points.

7. Active Learning: A Formal Definition
Definition: Active Learning (Schon and Cohn)
Active learning is the closed loop phenomenon of a learner selecting actions or making queries that influence what data are added to its training set.
This formulation has its origins in pool based learning
Given pool of unlabeled data we are only allowed to choose n samples to be labeled for training.
Pool based learning also arises from situations in which unlabeled data is easily available.
The main concept involved in active learning is finding ways to obtain good requests (queries) from the data pool.

8. Active Learning: Formulation
Define the following concepts needed for active learning
Notion of a Model and its associated Model Loss
A querying component q such that it will illicit response r from the domain or data.
A type of learner.
The Model will have the following properties:
It has some intrinsic loss (Model Loss) due to the lack of knowledge of the domain space.
We are afforded the ability to reduce this loss by making queries q to the data and using the received responses r.

9. Active Learning using Support Vector Machines
Outline of application of active learning with support vector machines
Review notions of support vector machines as they apply to active learning
SVMs as a binary classifier
Feature Space via kernel methods
Form of the set of classifiers in feature space
Version Space
Assumptions for version space
Version Space a Visual Example
Reformulation of SVMs in Version space
Model and Model Loss formulated for SVMs
Version Space as the model
Justification
Querying Algorithm
Simple Margin

10. Review of Support Vector Machines
Support vector machines are a maximum margin classifier.
Inherently SVMs are binary classifiers.
Given a data set {x1 … xn} and its corresponding labels {y1…yn} where each xi is in some input space X and each yi either 1 or -1.
A support vector machine tries to find a hyperplane such that all vectors lying on one side of the plane are classified as -1 and all vectors on the other side are classified as 1.
Generally we can project the input data space X via a Mercer kernel K to a higher dimensional feature space F.
In which a support vector machine can be used to find a separating hyperplane in the feature space F.

11. Review of Support Vector Machines
Formally, we will have a set of classifiers that have the following form:
Where the kernel K(x,y) can be written as an inner product:
We can write f(x) as an inner product of a weight vector w.
Where w is simply a weighted sum of the transformed input vectors in feature space.

12. Version Space
Assumptions: Proceed the formulation under the assumption that there exists some feature space in which the patterns are linearly separable.
Formally we define H as the set of all possible hyperplanes:
Define V (the version space) as the set of hyperplanes in H such that they separate the training data in the induced feature space.

13. Version Space: Visual Example
Set of all possible hypothesis H and the Version space
Notice that there is a bijection between the vectors w in W and the hyperplanes f(x) in H by definition

14. Version Space contd.
Since there is a bijection between H and W we can redefine the version space as.
Suppose, we observe a single input vector xi in feature space (and its corresponding label) and we wish to classify it via some hyperplane.
By doing so we limit the set of hyperplanes to those that will classify xi correctly.
In the parameter space W this has the effect of restricting points in W (w’s) to lie on one side of a hyperplane or the other in W.
This leads to the duality between the feature space F and parameter space W.
Formally stated points in F correspond to hyperplanes in W.

15. Duality of F and W: Visual Example

16. Reformulation of SVMs in Version Space
We know that SVMs find the hyperplane that maximizes the margin in feature space F.
This problem can be reformulated such that:
This formulation is finding w in the version space such that it maximizes the minimum distance to any of the delimiting hyperplanes.
A SVM will find the w such that:
w is the center of the largest hypersphere.
In which this hypersphere can be placed in the version space without intersecting the delimiting hyperplanes formed from the labeled training data.

17. Active Learning using SVMs
An active learner has three main components (f,q,X)
f is the classifier
X is a set of labeled training data
q is the query function that is able to query an unlabeled data set U
Define the model in this setting as version space V.
Define the model loss as the size of the version space.
Want to query the unlabeled data pool U such that we decrease the model loss.
Finding the best query q so that the response r will return a data point which reduces the size of the version space
Define the size or area of a version space as the surface area that surrounds the hypersphere ||w|| =1. Denote it as Area(V).

18. Justification of Version Space as a Model
If we had all the possible training data we could find the optimal w* which will exist somewhere in the parameter space W.
We know that w* will lie in each of the version spaces created by each of the queries to the unlabeled data set U.
Decreasing the version space will in turn reduce the area which w* can exist.
Which in turn gives a w that is closer to the optimal w*.

19. Querying function
In the most greedy sense we want the query q that is able to reduce the size of the version space by half.
Define Vi- and Vi+ as:
A greedy and costly way to decide the next best query is to compute the resulting version spaces (Vi- and Vi+ ) for each unlabeled instance in U.
Query for the xi+1 sample with the resulting smallest Area(V)
This is impractical given the complexity of SVMs.

20. Querying Algorithm
Because it is impractical to compute Vi- and Vi+ for every unlabeled instance we need an approximation.
Simple Margin:
Assume we have wi the current weight vector resulting from previous i labeled training examples.
We assume that the version space is relatively symmetric and that wi lies approximately in the center of the version space.
We query the unlabeled sample x whose induced hyperplane is closest to wi.
For each unlabeled instance the distance of x to wi is computed as:
We choose to label and add that data point which is closest to wi.

21. Implementation of Active Learning using SVMs
Data sets used
Wisconsin Diagnostic Breast Cancer data set
Purpose: To identify breast cancer as Benign or Malignant
Features: 11
Samples: 699
Break Down: Benign: 458 , Malignant: 241
Hypothyroid data set
Purpose: To identify if a patient is hypothyroid.
Features: 21
Samples: 7200
Break Down: 92 percent not hypothyroid
Internet Ad data set
Purpose: Predicting whether an image is an advertisement.
Features: 1558
Samples: 3279
Break Down: 2821 non ads, 458 ad
For all Testing a Linear SVM was used with the regularization parameter estimated based on the data set.

22. Wisconsin Breast Caner Data
Experiment setup:
If we add one sample at a time we will have to compute a QP problem more frequently.
We added samples in batches.
Instead of adding a single sample that is close to w we add for instance the 4 closest samples and retrain.
For the test we examine:
Compare Active learning to Passive learning.
For a batch size: 4
Compare the effect of different batch sizes
Compare the effect of the size of initial training data

23. Breast Cancer Data: Active Learning verses Passive Learning

24. Breast Cancer Data: Effect of varying batch size

25. Breast Cancer Data: Initial Training Data Size

26. For the test we examine:
Hypothyroid Data Set
For the test we examine:
Compare Active learning to Passive learning.
For a batch size: 8
Compare the effect of different batch sizes
Compare the effect of the size of initial training data

27. Hypothyroid Data: Active Learning verses Passive Learning

28. Hypothyroid Data: Effect of varying batch size

29. Hypothyroid Data: Initial Training Data Size

30. For the test we examine:
Internet Ads Data set
For the test we examine:
Compare Active learning to Passive learning.
Such a large set took a long time run.

31. Conclusions and Future Research
The test results reaffirmed our notion that active learning would perform better than that of a passive learner.
Achieved good generalization .
This was able to be accomplished with a smaller data set.
Active learning is a viable technique to use in practice.
From our results we can see that the initial number of samples does effect the performance of active learning.
Determine a method to make active learning less dependent on the size of the initial set of labeled parameters.