Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've taken the Coursera ML class. It's very easy if you have the adequate math background. And it's not very comprehensive, there are lots of machine learning methods that are not covered. So it's more like an introductory course to machine learning. But it's absolutely commendable how Andrew Ng takes the topic to such an understandable level that a clever high schooler who knows a little about programming could take…
>adequate math background Do you know what kind of math is needed other than linear algebra.
A Course in Machine Learning
31–40 of 42 posts
Re: A Course in Machine Learning
#32I wish more people followed what Hal writes in here : > A second goal of this book is to provide a view of machine learning that focuses on ideas and models, not on math. It is not possible (or even advisable) to avoid math. But math should be there to aid understanding, not hinder it. No book (yes not even PRML - Bishop), follows this diligently.
This is a harder problem than it sounds, and something I've given a lot of thought to. I think the underlying issue is that all machine learning was discovered through a combination of applied math and intuitive ideas/models. Without the intuitive model no one would have thought to discover the method, and without the math the intuitive idea would be a pipe dream. Both are fundamentally linked, and it's a bad idea to…
You're trying to make a prediction for some number you care about - let's say the value of a given stock price. You've come up with a set of hypotheses about which characteristics might help you make that prediction. Moreover, you have a set of examples that you've witnessed in the past, and you want to learn from that experience.
Using linear regression, you can test those hypotheses. You turn those characteristic features into a quantifiable number themselves. Linear regression is simply the name we give to the process of testing whether there's any validity to your hypothesis. If that hypothesis is true and you've discovered what makes the stock go up, then the corresponding feature will be given a high absolute coefficient. You'll also know whether it's an indicator of the stock going up or down, based on the sign of that coefficient. There's no math involved - you're testing your own intuition about how to make predictions.
The idea behind linear regression isn't "finding a line that fits a scatter plot." That's still math and it's still unhelpful to many people with serious, real-world applications. It's just an abstraction of the math that happens to leave out the formal representation.
To really communicate ideas in application, you need to move past the math entirely, and get to how it ties into people's judgments about data that they know well and have experience with, and show them that the intuition they can bring to the table is valuable (for feature determination). Otherwise, even scatter plots will often shut people out, because they "aren't good at math."
Re: A Course in Machine Learning
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
For a beginner to machine learning I'd recommend Andrew Ng's course notes and lectures over any textbook I've seen. But I prefer his Stanford CS 229 notes to Coursera for exactly the reasons you state: they are watered down. After you really can understand Andrew Ng's course notes I'd recommend a textbook because they go in more detail and cover more topics. My two favorites for general statistical machine learning a…
Isn't Murphy's book more up to date and comprehensive as a reference? Edit: Andrew Ng's Coursera course is CS229A ( http://cs229a.stanford.edu/ ), not really watered down.
Re: A Course in Machine Learning
#34This subject is difficult and requires a lot of time to understand and put something useful into practice. AI books appear frequently these days. I feel that most of books and tutorials fail to deliver good practical examples and meta-code, focusing more on mathematical proofs.
I am struggling to understand Peter Abeel's aprenticeship learning: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.74....
He can resume the thing in a couple of slides. It seams short and simple (!?) but I think I am still away from truly understand it. Maybe next year.
Re: A Course in Machine Learning
#35Re: A Course in Machine Learning
#36For those who might not know, Hal Daumé III is a highly respected researcher in machine learning, spending a lot of time working in Natural Language Processing (NLP). He also contributes his knowledge to many interesting open source projects. After creating an algorithm called SEARN for solving hard structured prediction problems, Daumé et al. went and created a practical and open implementation of the algorithm in V…
Re: A Course in Machine Learning
#37Hal uses this as the textbook for his undergrad machine learning course. Having recently taken that course (in the spring 2013 semester), I feel justified saying that this book needs a lot of work before it's usable as a textbook or even a learning tool. Most of the time this text served primarily as an initial "dereference" of ideas yielding not concrete information, but a series of other pointers that I'd need to c…
Judging by his homepage [1] he is at least on the tenure track. Unless the notion of an Assistant Professor is different over in the states. I agree about the sentiment about the book, at least the chapter on Neural Networks needs some serious work (I believe there are errors in there, maybe I should mail Hal). As a person and researcher I only have good things to say about him, do check out it his blog if you are into ML and NLP [2] and let's hope he will find the time to continue polishing on this freely available book (I do like his writing).
Re: A Course in Machine Learning
#38I wish more people followed what Hal writes in here : > A second goal of this book is to provide a view of machine learning that focuses on ideas and models, not on math. It is not possible (or even advisable) to avoid math. But math should be there to aid understanding, not hinder it. No book (yes not even PRML - Bishop), follows this diligently.
This is a harder problem than it sounds, and something I've given a lot of thought to. I think the underlying issue is that all machine learning was discovered through a combination of applied math and intuitive ideas/models. Without the intuitive model no one would have thought to discover the method, and without the math the intuitive idea would be a pipe dream. Both are fundamentally linked, and it's a bad idea to…
Re: A Course in Machine Learning
#39Edx is also offering the caltech ML course in mooc format: https://www.edx.org/course/caltechx/cs1156x/learning-data/11...
Re: A Course in Machine Learning
#40For those who might not know, Hal Daumé III is a highly respected researcher in machine learning, spending a lot of time working in Natural Language Processing (NLP). He also contributes his knowledge to many interesting open source projects. After creating an algorithm called SEARN for solving hard structured prediction problems, Daumé et al. went and created a practical and open implementation of the algorithm in V…
OP - Thanks for sharing!