Difference between revisions of "Expectation Regularization"

From Cohen Courses
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 3: Line 3:
 
This method introduced a way to take advantage of this prior knowledge.  
 
This method introduced a way to take advantage of this prior knowledge.  
  
Let's denote human-provided prior as <math> \tilde{p} </math>.
+
Let's denote human-provided prior as <math> \tilde{p} </math> and empirical label distribution as <math> \hat{p} </math>.
 +
The empirical label distribution is computed over unlabeled data set <math>U</math>,
 +
 
 +
<math>
 +
\hat{p}_{\theta}(y)=\frac{\sum_{x \in U} p_{\theta}(y|x)}{|U|}
 +
</math>
 +
 
 
We minimizes the distance between <math> \tilde{p} </math> and <math> \hat{p} </math>.
 
We minimizes the distance between <math> \tilde{p} </math> and <math> \hat{p} </math>.
 
KL-distance is used here so the regularization becomes
 
KL-distance is used here so the regularization becomes

Revision as of 19:24, 30 November 2010

This is a method introduced in G.S Mann and A. McCallum, ICML 2007. It is often served as a regularized term with the likelihood function. In practice human often have an insight of label prior distribution. This method introduced a way to take advantage of this prior knowledge.

Let's denote human-provided prior as and empirical label distribution as . The empirical label distribution is computed over unlabeled data set ,

We minimizes the distance between and . KL-distance is used here so the regularization becomes

For semi-supervised learning purposes, we can augment the objective function by adding regularization term. For example, the new conditional likelihood of data becomes

Note that this is a global regularizer instead of a local one, in which case it would assign all instances to the majority of the class.