亚洲男人的天堂2018av,欧美草比,久久久久久免费视频精选,国色天香在线看免费,久久久久亚洲av成人片仓井空

Machine learning (ML) has been increasingly used in a variety of domains, while solving ML programming tasks poses unique challenges because of the fundamentally different nature and construction from general programming tasks, especially for developers who do not have ML backgrounds. Automatic code generation that produces a code snippet from a natural language description can be a promising technique to accelerate ML programming tasks. In recent years, although many deep learning-based neural code generation models have been proposed with high accuracy, the fact that most of them are mainly evaluated on general programming tasks calls into question their effectiveness and usefulness in ML programming tasks. In this paper, we set out to investigate the effectiveness of existing neural code generation models on ML programming tasks. For our analysis, we select six state-of-the-art neural code generation models, and evaluate their performance on four widely used ML libraries, with newly-created 83K pairs of natural-language described ML programming tasks. Our empirical study reveals some good, bad, and missing aspects of neural code generation models on ML tasks, with a few major ones listed below. (Good) Neural code generation models perform significantly better on ML tasks than on non-ML tasks. (Bad) Most of the generated code is semantically incorrect. (Bad) Code generation models cannot significantly improve developers' completion time. (Good) The generated code can help developers write more correct code by providing developers with clues for using correct APIs. (Missing) The observation from our user study reveals the missing aspects of code generation for ML tasks, e.g., decomposing code generation for divide-and-conquer into two tasks: API sequence identification and API usage generation.

When training and evaluating machine reading comprehension models, it is very important to work with high-quality datasets that are also representative of real-world reading comprehension tasks. This requirement includes, for instance, having questions that are based on texts of different genres and require generating inferences or reflecting on the reading material. In this article we turn our attention to RACE, a dataset of English texts and corresponding multiple-choice questions (MCQs). Each MCQ consists of a question and four alternatives (of which one is the correct answer). RACE was constructed by Chinese teachers of English for human reading comprehension and is widely used as training material for machine reading comprehension models. By construction, RACE should satisfy the aforementioned quality requirements and the purpose of this article is to check whether they are indeed satisfied. We provide a detailed analysis of the test set of RACE for high-school students (1045 texts and 3498 corresponding MCQs) including (1) an evaluation of the difficulty of each MCQ and (2) annotations for the relevant pieces of the texts (called "bases") that are used to justify the plausibility of each alternative. A considerable number of MCQs appear not to fulfill basic requirements for this type of reading comprehension tasks, so we additionally identify the high-quality subset of the evaluated RACE corpus. We also demonstrate that the distribution of the positions of the bases for the alternatives is biased towards certain parts of texts, which is not necessarily desirable when evaluating MCQ answering and generation models.

Additive Manufacturing (AM) has emerged as a manufacturing process that allows the direct production of samples from digital models. To ensure that quality standards are met in all manufactured samples of a batch, X-ray computed tomography (X-CT) is often used combined with automated anomaly detection. For the latter, deep learning (DL) anomaly detection techniques are increasingly, as they can be trained to be robust to the material being analysed and resilient towards poor image quality. Unfortunately, most recent and popular DL models have been developed for 2D image processing, thereby disregarding valuable volumetric information. This study revisits recent supervised (UNet, UNet++, UNet 3+, MSS-UNet) and unsupervised (VAE, ceVAE, gmVAE, vqVAE) DL models for porosity analysis of AM samples from X-CT images and extends them to accept 3D input data with a 3D-patch pipeline for lower computational requirements, improved efficiency and generalisability. The supervised models were trained using the Focal Tversky loss to address class imbalance that arises from the low porosity in the training datasets. The output of the unsupervised models is post-processed to reduce misclassifications caused by their inability to adequately represent the object surface. The findings were cross-validated in a 5-fold fashion and include: a performance benchmark of the DL models, an evaluation of the post-processing algorithm, an evaluation of the effect of training supervised models with the output of unsupervised models. In a final performance benchmark on a test set with poor image quality, the best performing supervised model was MSS-UNet with an average precision of 0.808 $\pm$ 0.013, while the best unsupervised model was the post-processed ceVAE with 0.935 $\pm$ 0.001. The VAE/ceVAE models demonstrated superior capabilities, particularly when leveraging post-processing techniques.

Over the last few years, the number of works about deep learning applied to the medical field has increased enormously. The necessity of a rigorous assessment of these models is required to explain these results to all people involved in medical exams. A recent field in the machine learning area is explainable artificial intelligence, also known as XAI, which targets to explain the results of such black box models to permit the desired assessment. This survey analyses several recent studies in the XAI field applied to medical diagnosis research, allowing some explainability of the machine learning results in several different diseases, such as cancers and COVID-19.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is envisioned to play a key role in future wireless technologies, with deep neural networks (DNNs) enabling digital receivers to learn to operate in challenging communication scenarios. However, wireless receiver design poses unique challenges that fundamentally differ from those encountered in traditional deep learning domains. The main challenges arise from the limited power and computational resources of wireless devices, as well as from the dynamic nature of wireless communications, which causes continual changes to the data distribution. These challenges impair conventional AI based on highly-parameterized DNNs, motivating the development of adaptive, flexible, and light-weight AI for wireless communications, which is the focus of this article. Here, we propose that AI-based design of wireless receivers requires rethinking of the three main pillars of AI: architecture, data, and training algorithms. In terms of architecture, we review how to design compact DNNs via model-based deep learning. Then, we discuss how to acquire training data for deep receivers without compromising spectral efficiency. Finally, we review efficient, reliable, and robust training algorithms via meta-learning and generalized Bayesian learning. Numerical results are presented to demonstrate the complementary effectiveness of each of the surveyed methods. We conclude by presenting opportunities for future research on the development of practical deep receivers

Deep neural networks (DNNs) have become a proven and indispensable machine learning tool. As a black-box model, it remains difficult to diagnose what aspects of the model's input drive the decisions of a DNN. In countless real-world domains, from legislation and law enforcement to healthcare, such diagnosis is essential to ensure that DNN decisions are driven by aspects appropriate in the context of its use. The development of methods and studies enabling the explanation of a DNN's decisions has thus blossomed into an active, broad area of research. A practitioner wanting to study explainable deep learning may be intimidated by the plethora of orthogonal directions the field has taken. This complexity is further exacerbated by competing definitions of what it means ``to explain'' the actions of a DNN and to evaluate an approach's ``ability to explain''. This article offers a field guide to explore the space of explainable deep learning aimed at those uninitiated in the field. The field guide: i) Introduces three simple dimensions defining the space of foundational methods that contribute to explainable deep learning, ii) discusses the evaluations for model explanations, iii) places explainability in the context of other related deep learning research areas, and iv) finally elaborates on user-oriented explanation designing and potential future directions on explainable deep learning. We hope the guide is used as an easy-to-digest starting point for those just embarking on research in this field.

Generalization to out-of-distribution (OOD) data is a capability natural to humans yet challenging for machines to reproduce. This is because most learning algorithms strongly rely on the i.i.d.~assumption on source/target data, which is often violated in practice due to domain shift. Domain generalization (DG) aims to achieve OOD generalization by using only source data for model learning. Since first introduced in 2011, research in DG has made great progresses. In particular, intensive research in this topic has led to a broad spectrum of methodologies, e.g., those based on domain alignment, meta-learning, data augmentation, or ensemble learning, just to name a few; and has covered various vision applications such as object recognition, segmentation, action recognition, and person re-identification. In this paper, for the first time a comprehensive literature review is provided to summarize the developments in DG for computer vision over the past decade. Specifically, we first cover the background by formally defining DG and relating it to other research fields like domain adaptation and transfer learning. Second, we conduct a thorough review into existing methods and present a categorization based on their methodologies and motivations. Finally, we conclude this survey with insights and discussions on future research directions.

Predictions obtained by, e.g., artificial neural networks have a high accuracy but humans often perceive the models as black boxes. Insights about the decision making are mostly opaque for humans. Particularly understanding the decision making in highly sensitive areas such as healthcare or fifinance, is of paramount importance. The decision-making behind the black boxes requires it to be more transparent, accountable, and understandable for humans. This survey paper provides essential definitions, an overview of the different principles and methodologies of explainable Supervised Machine Learning (SML). We conduct a state-of-the-art survey that reviews past and recent explainable SML approaches and classifies them according to the introduced definitions. Finally, we illustrate principles by means of an explanatory case study and discuss important future directions.

Machine learning plays a role in many deployed decision systems, often in ways that are difficult or impossible to understand by human stakeholders. Explaining, in a human-understandable way, the relationship between the input and output of machine learning models is essential to the development of trustworthy machine-learning-based systems. A burgeoning body of research seeks to define the goals and methods of explainability in machine learning. In this paper, we seek to review and categorize research on counterfactual explanations, a specific class of explanation that provides a link between what could have happened had input to a model been changed in a particular way. Modern approaches to counterfactual explainability in machine learning draw connections to the established legal doctrine in many countries, making them appealing to fielded systems in high-impact areas such as finance and healthcare. Thus, we design a rubric with desirable properties of counterfactual explanation algorithms and comprehensively evaluate all currently-proposed algorithms against that rubric. Our rubric provides easy comparison and comprehension of the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches and serves as an introduction to major research themes in this field. We also identify gaps and discuss promising research directions in the space of counterfactual explainability.

In the last years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has achieved a notable momentum that may deliver the best of expectations over many application sectors across the field. For this to occur, the entire community stands in front of the barrier of explainability, an inherent problem of AI techniques brought by sub-symbolism (e.g. ensembles or Deep Neural Networks) that were not present in the last hype of AI. Paradigms underlying this problem fall within the so-called eXplainable AI (XAI) field, which is acknowledged as a crucial feature for the practical deployment of AI models. This overview examines the existing literature in the field of XAI, including a prospect toward what is yet to be reached. We summarize previous efforts to define explainability in Machine Learning, establishing a novel definition that covers prior conceptual propositions with a major focus on the audience for which explainability is sought. We then propose and discuss about a taxonomy of recent contributions related to the explainability of different Machine Learning models, including those aimed at Deep Learning methods for which a second taxonomy is built. This literature analysis serves as the background for a series of challenges faced by XAI, such as the crossroads between data fusion and explainability. Our prospects lead toward the concept of Responsible Artificial Intelligence, namely, a methodology for the large-scale implementation of AI methods in real organizations with fairness, model explainability and accountability at its core. Our ultimate goal is to provide newcomers to XAI with a reference material in order to stimulate future research advances, but also to encourage experts and professionals from other disciplines to embrace the benefits of AI in their activity sectors, without any prior bias for its lack of interpretability.