BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Daniel J. Lizotte

Daniel J. Lizotte contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Machine LearningArtificial IntelligenceMethodology

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Decision-Directed Data Decomposition

We present an algorithm, Decision-Directed Data Decomposition (D4), which decomposes a dataset into two components. The first contains most of the useful information for a specified supervised learning task. The second orthogonal component contains little information about the task but retains associations and information that were not targeted. The algorithm is simple and scalable. We illustrate its application in image and text processing domains. Our results show that 1) post-hoc application of D4 to an image representation space can remove information about specified concepts without impacting other concepts, 2) D4 is able to improve predictive generalization in certain settings, and 3) applying D4 to word embedding representations produces state-of-the-art results in debiasing.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Generative Multiple-Instance Learning Models For Quantitative Electromyography

We present a comprehensive study of the use of generative modeling approaches for Multiple-Instance Learning (MIL) problems. In MIL a learner receives training instances grouped together into bags with labels for the bags only (which might not be correct for the comprised instances). Our work was motivated by the task of facilitating the diagnosis of neuromuscular disorders using sets of motor unit potential trains (MUPTs) detected within a muscle which can be cast as a MIL problem. Our approach leads to a state-of-the-art solution to the problem of muscle classification. By introducing and analyzing generative models for MIL in a general framework and examining a variety of model structures and components, our work also serves as a methodological guide to modelling MIL tasks. We evaluate our proposed methods both on MUPT datasets and on the MUSK1 dataset, one of the most widely used benchmarks for MIL.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Active Model Selection

Classical learning assumes the learner is given a labeled data sample, from which it learns a model. The field of Active Learning deals with the situation where the learner begins not with a training sample, but instead with resources that it can use to obtain information to help identify the optimal model. To better understand this task, this paper presents and analyses the simplified "(budgeted) active model selection" version, which captures the pure exploration aspect of many active learning problems in a clean and simple problem formulation. Here the learner can use a fixed budget of "model probes" (where each probe evaluates the specified model on a random indistinguishable instance) to identify which of a given set of possible models has the highest expected accuracy. Our goal is a policy that sequentially determines which model to probe next, based on the information observed so far. We present a formal description of this task, and show that it is NPhard in general. We then investigate a number of algorithms for this task, including several existing ones (eg, "Round-Robin", "Interval Estimation", "Gittins") as well as some novel ones (e.g., "Biased-Robin"), describing first their approximation properties and then their empirical performance on various problem instances. We observe empirically that the simple biased-robin algorithm significantly outperforms the other algorithms in the case of identical costs and priors.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Budgeted Learning of Naive-Bayes Classifiers

Frequently, acquiring training data has an associated cost. We consider the situation where the learner may purchase data during training, subject TO a budget. IN particular, we examine the CASE WHERE each feature label has an associated cost, AND the total cost OF ALL feature labels acquired during training must NOT exceed the budget.This paper compares methods FOR choosing which feature label TO purchase next, given the budget AND the CURRENT belief state OF naive Bayes model parameters.Whereas active learning has traditionally focused ON myopic(greedy) strategies FOR query selection, this paper presents a tractable method FOR incorporating knowledge OF the budget INTO the decision making process, which improves performance.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Set-valued dynamic treatment regimes for competing outcomes

Dynamic treatment regimes operationalize the clinical decision process as a sequence of functions, one for each clinical decision, where each function takes as input up-to-date patient information and gives as output a single recommended treatment. Current methods for estimating optimal dynamic treatment regimes, for example Q-learning, require the specification of a single outcome by which the `goodness' of competing dynamic treatment regimes are measured. However, this is an over-simplification of the goal of clinical decision making, which aims to balance several potentially competing outcomes. For example, often a balance must be struck between treatment effectiveness and side-effect burden. We propose a method for constructing dynamic treatment regimes that accommodates competing outcomes by recommending sets of treatments at each decision point. Formally, we construct a sequence of set-valued functions that take as input up-to-date patient information and give as output a recommended subset of the possible treatments. For a given patient history, the recommended set of treatments contains all treatments that are not inferior according to any of the competing outcomes. When there is more than one decision point, constructing these set-valued functions requires solving a non-trivial enumeration problem. We offer an exact enumeration algorithm by recasting the problem as a linear mixed integer program. The proposed methods are illustrated using data from a depression study and the CATIE schizophrenia study.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access