Browse Bar: Browse by Author | Browse by Category | Browse by Citation | Advanced Search
Author(s): Carpenter, G.A. |
Year: 1996
Citation: In B. Kosko, Fuzzy Engineering, New York: Prentice Hall, 467-497.
Abstract: Adaptive Resonance Theory (ART) models are real-time neural networks for category learning, pattern recognition, and prediction. Unsupervised fuzzy ART and supervised fuzzy ARTMAP networks synthesize fuzzy logic and ART by exploiting the formal similarity between the computations of fuzzy subsethood and the dynamics of ART category choice, search, and learning. Fuzzy ART self-organizes stable recognition categories in response to arbitrary sequences of analog or binary input patterns. It generalizes the binary ART 1 model, replacing the set-theoretic intersection with the fuzzy intersection, or component-wise minimum. A normalization procedure called complement coding leads to a symmetric theory in which the fuzzy intersection and the fuzzy union, or component-wise maximum, play complementary roles. Complement coding preserves individual feature amplitudes while normalizing the input vector, and prevents a potential category proliferation problem. Adaptive weights start equal to one and can only decrease in time. A geometric interpretation of fuzzy ART represents each category as a box that increases in size as weights decrease. A matching criterion controls search, determining how close an input and a learned representation must be for a category to accept the input as a new exemplar. A vigilance parameter sets to matching criterion and determines how finely or coarsely an ART system will partition inputs. High vigilance creates fine categories, represented by small boxes. Learning stops when boxes cover the input space. With fast learning, fixed vigilance, and an arbitrary input set, learning stabilizes after just on presentation of each input. A fast-commit slow-recode option allows rapid learning of rare events yet buffers memories against recoding by noisy inputs.
Fuzzy ARTMAP unites two fuzzy ART networks to solve supervised learning and prediction problems. A Minimax Learning Rule controls ARTMAP category structure, conjointly minimizing predictive error and maximizing code compression. Low vigilance maximizes compression but may therefore cause very different inputs to make the same prediction. When this coarse grouping strategy causes a predictive error, an internal match tracking control process increases vigilance just enough to correct the error. ARTMAP automatically constructs a minimal number of recognition categories, or hidden units, to meet accuracy criteria. An ARTMAP voting strategy improves prediction by training the system several times using different orderings of the input set. Voting assigns confidence estimates to competing predictions given small, noisy, or incomplete training sets. ARPA benchmark simulations illustrate fuzzy ARTMAP dynamics. The chapter also compares fuzzy ARTMAP to Salzberg?s Nested Generalized Exemplar (NGE) and to Simpson?s Fuzzy Min-Max Classifier (FMMC); and concludes with a summary of ART and ARTMAP applications.
Topics:
Machine Learning,
Models:
ART 1,
ART 2 / Fuzzy ART,
