Abstract. Valiant (1984) and others have studied the problem of learning various classes of Boolean functions from examples. Here we discuss incremental learning of these functions. We consider a setting in which the learner responds to each example according to a current hypothesis. Then the learner updates the hypothesis, if necessary, based on the correct classification of the example. One natural measure of the quality of learning in this setting is the number of mistakes the learner makes. For suitable classes of functions, learning algorithms are available that make a bounded number of mistakes, with the bound independent of the number of examples seen by the learner. We present one such algorithm that learns disjunctive Boolean functions, along with variants for learning other classes of Boolean functions. The basic method can be expressed as a linear-threshold algorithm. A primary advantage of this algorithm is that the number of mistakes grows only logarithmically with the number of irrelevant attributes in the examples. At the same time, the algorithm is computationally efficient in both time and space.

No abstract

Valiant (1984) and others have studied the problem of learning various classes of Boolean functions from examples. Here we discuss incremental learning of these functions. We consider a setting in which the learner responds to each example according to a current hypothesis. Then the learner updates the hypothesis, if necessary, based on the correct classification of the example. One natural measure of the quality of learning in this setting is the number of mistakes the learner makes. For suitable classes of functions, learning algorithms are available that make a bounded number of mistakes, with the bound independent of the number of examples seen by the learner. We present one such algorithm that learns disjunctive Boolean functions, along with variants for learning other classes of Boolean functions. The basic method can be expressed as a linear-threshold algorithm. A primary advantage of this algorithm is that the number of mistakes grows only logarithmically with the number of irrelevant attributes in the examples. At the same time, the algorithm is computationally efficient in both time and space.

We study the construction of prediction algorithms in a situation in which a learner faces a sequence of trials, with a prediction to be made in each, and the goal of the learner is t o make few mistakes. We are interested in the case that the learner has reason to believe that one of some pool of known algorithms will perform well, but the learner does not know which one. A simple and effective method, based on weighted voting, is introduced for constructing a compound algorithm in such a circumstance. We call this method the Weighted Majority Algorithm. We show that this algorithm is robust w.r.t. errors in the data. We discuss various versions of the Weighted Majority Algorithm and prove mistake bounds for them that are closely related to the mistake bounds of the best algorithms of the pool. For example, given a sequence of trials, if there is an algorithm in the pool A that makes at most m mistakes then the Weighted Majority Algorithm will make at *Supported by ONR grant N00014-85-K-0445. Part of this research was done while this author was at the University of Calif. at Santa Cruz with support from ONR grant N00014-86-K-0454 'Supported by ONR grant N00014-86-K-0454. Part of this research was done while this author was on sabbatical at Aiken Computation Laboratory, Harvard, with partial support from the ONR grants N00014-85-K-0445 and N00014-86-K-0454 most c(1og I d1 + m) mistakes on that sequence, where c is fixed constant.

Abstract. The problem of learning linear-discriminant concepts can be solved by various mistake-driven update procedures, including the Winnow family of algorithms and the well-known Perceptron algorithm. In this paper we define the general class of "quasi-additive" algorithms, which includes Perceptron and Winnow as special cases. We give a single proof of convergence that covers a broad subset of algorithms in this class, including both Perceptron and Winnow, but also many new algorithms. Our proof hinges on analyzing a generic measure of progress construction that gives insight as to when and how such algorithms converge.Our measure of progress construction also permits us to obtain good mistake bounds for individual algorithms. We apply our unified analysis to new algorithms as well as existing algorithms. When applied to known algorithms, our method "automatically" produces close variants of existing proofs (recovering similar bounds)-thus showing that, in a certain sense, these seemingly diverse results are fundamentally isomorphic. However, we also demonstrate that the unifying principles are more broadly applicable, and analyze a new class of algorithms that smoothly interpolate between the additive-update behavior of Perceptron and the multiplicative-update behavior of Winnow.