Geometrical Approaches to Active Learning

  • Kamil Adiloglu
  • Robert Annies
  • Falk-Florian Henrich
  • André Paus
  • Klaus Obermayer

Learning from examples is a key property of autonomous agents. In our contribution, we want to focus on a particular class of strategies which are often referred to as “optimal experimental design“ or “active learning“. Learning machines, which employ these strategies, request examples which are maximal “informative“ for learning a predictor rather than “passively“ scanning their environment. There is a large body of empirical evidence, that active learning is more efficient in terms of the required number of examples. Hence, active learning should be preferred whenever training examples are costly to obtain. In our contribution, we will report new results for active learning methods which we are currently investigating and which are based on the geometrical concept of a version space. We will derive universal hard bounds for the prediction performance using tools from differential geometry, and we will also provide practical algorithms based on kernel methods and Monte-Carlo techniques. The new techniques are applied in psychoacoustical experiments for sound design.


Active Learning Version Space Generalization Error Inductive Learning Machine Learn Research 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    S. Fine, R. Gilad-Bachrach, and E. Shamir. Learning using query by committee, linear separation and random walks. Theoretical Computer Science, 284:25-51, 2002.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Y. Freund, H. S. Seung, E. Shamir, and N. Tishby. Selective sampling using the query by committee algorithm. Machine Learning, 28(2-3):133-168, 1997.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Opper, H. S. Seung, and H. Sompolinsky. Query by committee. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Workshop on Computational Learning Theory, pages 287-294, Pittsburgh, PA, 1992.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Tong and D. Koller. Support vector machine active learning with applications to text clas- sification. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 2:45-66, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M.-F. Balcan, A. Beygelzimer, and J. Langford. Agnostic active learning. In ICML ’06: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 65-72, 2006. ACM Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Francis R. Bach. Active learning for misspecified generalized linear models. In B. Sch ölkopf, J. Platt, and T. Hoffman, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 19, pages 65-72. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2007.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. M. Mitchell. Generalization as search. Artificial Intelligence, 18(2):203-226, 1982.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Banerjee, I. S. Dhillon, J. Ghosh, and S. Sra. Clustering on the unit hypersphere using von mises-fisher distributions. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 6:1345-1382, 2005.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Herbrich, T. Graepel, C. Campbell, and C.K.I. Williams. Bayes Point Machines. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 1(4):245-278, 2001.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Rujan. Playing Billiards in Version Space. Neural Computation, 9(1):99-122, 1997.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    G. Wahba. Spline Models for Observational Data, volume 59 of CBMS-NSF Regional Conference Series in Applied Mathematics. SIAM, Philadelphia, 1990.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. Herbrich. Learning Kernel Classifiers-Theory and Algorithms. Adaptive Computation and Machine Learning. MIT Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    F.-F. Henrich and K. Obermayer. Active learning by spherical subdivision. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 9:105-130, 2008.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Rochesso and F. Fontana. The Sounding Object. Mondo Estremo, Firenze, Italy, 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kamil Adiloglu
    • 1
  • Robert Annies
    • 1
  • Falk-Florian Henrich
    • 1
  • André Paus
    • 1
  • Klaus Obermayer
    • 1
  1. 1.Neural Information ProcessingTechnische Universität BerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations