[SOLVED] CSE417: Introduction to Machine Learning Problem Set 1

30.00 $

Category:
Click Category Button to View Your Next Assignment | Homework

You will receive the following solution file(s) instantly after successful payment:

zip file icon hw_1.zip (516.6 KB)
Assignment Instructions Updated Recently? Submit Below and we will provide new Solution!
Submit New Instructions
🔒 Securely Powered by:
Secure Checkout
5/5 - (2 votes)

Problems

  1. LFD Problem 1.3 2. Out of textbook 3. LFD Problem 1.7 4. LFD Problem 1.8

 

 

CSE417: Introduction to Machine Learning

Problem Set 1

Q1: LFD Problem 1.3

(a)

Since wis the optimal set of weights, for all 1 ≤ n N, wT xn must have same sign as yn since a linear separation is achieved.

Therefore, for all 1 ≤ n N, yn(wT xn) > 0, which suggests min1≤nNyn(wT xn) > 0, or ρ > 0

(b)

Given the update rule, w(t + 1) = w(t) + y(t)x(t), transpose both sides and multiply by w:

w(t + 1)T = w(t)T + (y(t)x(t))T

w(t + 1)T w= w(t)T w+ (y(t)x(t))T w

w(t + 1)T w= w(t)T w+ y(t)(x(t)T w) → given y(t) is 1 * 1

w(t + 1)T w= w(t)T w+ y(t)(wT x(t)) → given wT x(t) is 1*1 so its symmetric

And by the definition of ρ = min1≤nNyn(wT xn), for all 1 ≤ t N, we have rho y(t)(wT x(t).

Then we could conclude that:

w(t + 1)T ww(t)T w+ ρ

Base Case: t = 0, since we assumed w(0) = 0, we have:

wT (0)w= 0 ≥ 0ρ = 0

Induction: for t = n, given that the inequality is valid:

wT (n)w

and incorporate the inequality we deduced above:

wT (n + 1)ww(n)T w+ ρ wT (n + 1)w+ ρ wT (n + 1)w≥ (n + 1)ρ

so the inequality must also be valid for t = n + 1. Thus proved.

(c)

Given the update rule, w(t+1) = w(t)+y(t)x(t), transpose both sides and multiply by the original equation:

w(t + 1) ∗ w(t + 1)T = (w(t) + (y(t)x(t)))(w(t)T + (y(t)x(t))T )

||w(t + 1)||2 = ||w(t)||2 + 2y(t)x(t)w(t)T + y(t)2||x(t)||2

Since for any y(t), we have y(t)2 = 1, and 2y(t)x(t)w(t)T < 0 given y(t) represents a misclassified point, we have:

||w(t + 1)||2 ≤ ||w(t)||2 + y(t)2||x(t)||2 ||w(t + 1)||2 ≤ ||w(t)||2 + ||x(t)||2

(d)

Proof:

Base case: for t = 0, ||w(t)||2 = 0 ≤ 0 ∗ R2 = 0

Induction:

Given that ||w(t)||2 tR2, we have:

||w(t + 1)||2 ≤ ||w(t)||2 + ||x(t − 1)||2

||w(t + 1)||2 ≤ ||w(t)||2 + R2 ||w(t + 1)||2 ≤ ||w(t)||2 + R2

||w(t + 1)||2 ≤ ||w(t)||2 + R2

||w(t + 1)||2 tR2 + R2

||w(t + 1)||2 ≤ (t + 1)R2

2

(e)

Proof: Using the conclusion in part (b):

given the conclusion in (d)

Since  where θ represents the angle between wT (t) and w, we must have

1, then we could rewrite the inequality to be:

Given That      t ≥ 0

2

 

Q2

The first plot is the number of operation for each iteration and the second plot is a histogram of log difference. Plot attached below:

Q3: LFD Problem 1.7

(a)

For µ = 0.05

P[0|10,0.05] = 0.9510 = 0.5987

1 Coin: P = 0.5987

10 Coins: P = 1 − (1 − 0.9510)10 = 0.9998

1000 Coins: P = 1 − (1 − 0.9510)1000 = 1

1000000 Coins: P = 1 − (1 − 0.9510)1000000 = 1

For µ = 0.8

P[0,|10,0.8] = 0.210 = 1.024e − 7

1 Coin: P = 1.024e-7

10 Coins: P = 1 − (1 − 0.210)10 = 0.000001024

1000 Coins: P = 1 − (1 − 0.210)1000 = .0001024

1000000 Coins: P = 1 − (1 − 0.210)1000000 = 0.09733

(b)

The result should be equivalent to P = 1 ) for each , which produces a step function satisfy the following condition:

Using Hoeffding bound for 2 coins,

Plot attached below:

Q4: LFD Problem 1.8

(a)

By definition, we have that Then for each α > 0, we have:

Proved.

(b)

By definition, E[(u µ)2] = σ2, then using the conclusion in part (a), we have:

(c)

By definition, for N iid random variables (u1,u2,…un) each with E(ui) = µ and variance V ar(ui) = σ2 for 0 < i n

Letwe have that:

And that:

Then similar to that in part (b):

proved.

  • hw_1.zip