When creating computer-generated imagery, final scenes appearing in movies and television productions are usually produced by rendering more than one "layer" or "pass," which are multiple images designed to be put together through digital compositing to form a completed frame. Rendering in passes is based on a traditions in motion control photography which predate CGI. As an example, for a visual effects shot, a camera could be programmed to move past a physical model of a spaceship in one pass to film the fully lit beauty pass of the ship, and then to repeat exactly the same camera move passing the ship again to photograph additional elements such as the illuminated windows in the ship or its thrusters. Once all of the passes were filmed, they could then be optically printed together to form a completed shot. The terms render layers and render passes are sometimes used interchangeably. However, rendering in layers refers specifically to separating different objects into separate images, such as a layer each for foreground characters, sets, distant landscape, and sky. On the other hand, rendering in passes refers to separating out different aspects of the scene, such as shadows, highlights, or reflections, into separate images.
Brownout (software engineering)
Brownout in software engineering is a technique that involves disabling certain features of an application. == Description == Brownout is used to increase the robustness of an application to computing capacity shortage. If too many users are simultaneously accessing an application hosted online, the underlying computing infrastructure may become overloaded, rendering the application unresponsive. Users are likely to abandon the application and switch to competing alternatives, hence incurring long-term revenue loss. To better deal with such a situation, the application can be given brownout capabilities: The application will disable certain features – e.g., an online shop will no longer display recommendations of related products – to avoid overload. Although reducing features generally has a negative impact on the short-term revenue of the application owner, long-term revenue loss can be avoided. The technique is inspired by brownouts in power grids, which consists in reducing the power grid's voltage in case electricity demand exceeds production. Some consumers, such as incandescent light bulbs, will dim – hence originating the term – and draw less power, thus helping match demand with production. Similarly, a brownout application helps match its computing capacity requirements to what is available on the target infrastructure. Brownout complements elasticity. The former can help the application withstand short-term capacity shortage, but does so without changing the capacity available to the application. In contrast, elasticity consists of adding (or removing) capacity to the application, preferably in advance, so as to avoid capacity shortage altogether. The two techniques can be combined; e.g., brownout is triggered when the number of users increases unexpectedly until elasticity can be triggered, the latter usually requiring minutes to show an effect. Brownout is relatively non-intrusive for the developer, for example, it can be implemented as an advice in aspect-oriented programming. However, surrounding components, such as load-balancers, need to be made brownout-aware to distinguish between cases where an application is running normally and cases where the application maintains a low response time by triggering brownout. == Usage in phased deprecation == A related use of the brownout concept in software engineering is the deliberate introduction of temporary outages to a system, API or feature that is being phased out. This is sometimes also called a "scream test" when it is used to discover unknown dependents of a system or API. The intention is to allow detection of downstream consumers of an API or service who may otherwise have missed deprecation announcements or to uncover hidden side-effects of the deprecation that may have been overlooked. The intention is that developers of dependent systems will notice their own system failures caused by the upstream brownout. Such brownouts are typically pre-announced scheduled outages or probabilistic in nature (such as artificially failing a percentage of requests). As a brownout is only a temporary or partial outage, it provides downstream consumers of an API or service time to remove any discovered dependencies on the deprecated API before it is fully retired. For consumers that have already prepared for the deprecation, a brownout provides valuable testing that the final removal of the service won't cause any unexpected problems.
Natarajan dimension
In the theory of Probably Approximately Correct Machine Learning, the Natarajan dimension characterizes the complexity of learning a set of functions, generalizing from the Vapnik–Chervonenkis dimension for boolean functions to multi-class functions. Originally introduced as the Generalized Dimension by Natarajan, it was subsequently renamed the Natarajan Dimension by Haussler and Long. == Definition == Let H {\displaystyle H} be a set of functions from a set X {\displaystyle X} to a set Y {\displaystyle Y} . H {\displaystyle H} shatters a set C ⊂ X {\displaystyle C\subset X} if there exist two functions f 0 , f 1 ∈ H {\displaystyle f_{0},f_{1}\in H} such that For every x ∈ C , f 0 ( x ) ≠ f 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle x\in C,f_{0}(x)\neq f_{1}(x)} . For every B ⊂ C {\displaystyle B\subset C} , there exists a function h ∈ H {\displaystyle h\in H} such that for all x ∈ B , h ( x ) = f 0 ( x ) {\displaystyle x\in B,h(x)=f_{0}(x)} and for all x ∈ C − B , h ( x ) = f 1 ( x ) {\displaystyle x\in C-B,h(x)=f_{1}(x)} . The Natarajan dimension of H is the maximal cardinality of a set shattered by H {\displaystyle H} . It is easy to see that if | Y | = 2 {\displaystyle |Y|=2} , the Natarajan dimension collapses to the Vapnik–Chervonenkis dimension. Shalev-Shwartz and Ben-David present comprehensive material on multi-class learning and the Natarajan dimension, including uniform convergence and learnability. Recently, Cohen et al showed that the Natarajan dimension is the dominant term governing agnostic multi-class PAC learnability.
Relief (feature selection)
Relief is an algorithm developed by Kenji Kira and Larry Rendell in 1992 that takes a filter-method approach to feature selection that is notably sensitive to feature interactions. It was originally designed for application to binary classification problems with discrete or numerical features. Relief calculates a feature score for each feature which can then be applied to rank and select top scoring features for feature selection. Alternatively, these scores may be applied as feature weights to guide downstream modeling. Relief feature scoring is based on the identification of feature value differences between nearest neighbor instance pairs. If a feature value difference is observed in a neighboring instance pair with the same class (a 'hit'), the feature score decreases. Alternatively, if a feature value difference is observed in a neighboring instance pair with different class values (a 'miss'), the feature score increases. The original Relief algorithm has since inspired a family of Relief-based feature selection algorithms (RBAs), including the ReliefF algorithm. Beyond the original Relief algorithm, RBAs have been adapted to (1) perform more reliably in noisy problems, (2) generalize to multi-class problems (3) generalize to numerical outcome (i.e. regression) problems, and (4) to make them robust to incomplete (i.e. missing) data. To date, the development of RBA variants and extensions has focused on four areas; (1) improving performance of the 'core' Relief algorithm, i.e. examining strategies for neighbor selection and instance weighting, (2) improving scalability of the 'core' Relief algorithm to larger feature spaces through iterative approaches, (3) methods for flexibly adapting Relief to different data types, and (4) improving Relief run efficiency. Their strengths are that they are not dependent on heuristics, they run in low-order polynomial time, and they are noise-tolerant and robust to feature interactions, as well as being applicable for binary or continuous data; however, it does not discriminate between redundant features, and low numbers of training instances fool the algorithm. == Relief Algorithm == Take a data set with n instances of p features, belonging to two known classes. Within the data set, each feature should be scaled to the interval [0 1] (binary data should remain as 0 and 1). The algorithm will be repeated m times. Start with a p-long weight vector (W) of zeros. At each iteration, take the feature vector (X) belonging to one random instance, and the feature vectors of the instance closest to X (by Euclidean distance) from each class. The closest same-class instance is called 'near-hit', and the closest different-class instance is called 'near-miss'. Update the weight vector such that W i = W i − ( x i − n e a r H i t i ) 2 + ( x i − n e a r M i s s i ) 2 , {\displaystyle W_{i}=W_{i}-(x_{i}-\mathrm {nearHit} _{i})^{2}+(x_{i}-\mathrm {nearMiss} _{i})^{2},} where i {\displaystyle i} indexes the components and runs from 1 to p. Thus the weight of any given feature decreases if it differs from that feature in nearby instances of the same class more than nearby instances of the other class, and increases in the reverse case. After m iterations, divide each element of the weight vector by m. This becomes the relevance vector. Features are selected if their relevance is greater than a threshold τ. Kira and Rendell's experiments showed a clear contrast between relevant and irrelevant features, allowing τ to be determined by inspection. However, it can also be determined by Chebyshev's inequality for a given confidence level (α) that a τ of 1/sqrt(αm) is good enough to make the probability of a Type I error less than α, although it is stated that τ can be much smaller than that. Relief was also described as generalizable to multinomial classification by decomposition into a number of binary problems. == ReliefF Algorithm == Kononenko et al. propose a number of updates to Relief. Firstly, they find the near-hit and near-miss instances using the Manhattan (L1) norm rather than the Euclidean (L2) norm, although the rationale is not specified. Furthermore, they found taking the absolute differences between xi and near-hiti, and xi and near-missi to be sufficient when updating the weight vector (rather than the square of those differences). === Reliable probability estimation === Rather than repeating the algorithm m times, implement it exhaustively (i.e. n times, once for each instance) for relatively small n (up to one thousand). Furthermore, rather than finding the single nearest hit and single nearest miss, which may cause redundant and noisy attributes to affect the selection of the nearest neighbors, ReliefF searches for k nearest hits and misses and averages their contribution to the weights of each feature. k can be tuned for any individual problem. === Incomplete data === In ReliefF, the contribution of missing values to the feature weight is determined using the conditional probability that two values should be the same or different, approximated with relative frequencies from the data set. This can be calculated if one or both features are missing. === Multi-class problems === Rather than use Kira and Rendell's proposed decomposition of a multinomial classification into a number of binomial problems, ReliefF searches for k near misses from each different class and averages their contributions for updating W, weighted with the prior probability of each class. == Other Relief-based Algorithm Extensions/Derivatives == The following RBAs are arranged chronologically from oldest to most recent. They include methods for improving (1) the core Relief algorithm concept, (2) iterative approaches for scalability, (3) adaptations to different data types, (4) strategies for computational efficiency, or (5) some combination of these goals. For more on RBAs see these book chapters or this most recent review paper. === RRELIEFF === Robnik-Šikonja and Kononenko propose further updates to ReliefF, making it appropriate for regression. === Relieved-F === Introduced deterministic neighbor selection approach and a new approach for incomplete data handling. === Iterative Relief === Implemented method to address bias against non-monotonic features. Introduced the first iterative Relief approach. For the first time, neighbors were uniquely determined by a radius threshold and instances were weighted by their distance from the target instance. === I-RELIEF === Introduced sigmoidal weighting based on distance from target instance. All instance pairs (not just a defined subset of neighbors) contributed to score updates. Proposed an on-line learning variant of Relief. Extended the iterative Relief concept. Introduced local-learning updates between iterations for improved convergence. === TuRF (a.k.a. Tuned ReliefF) === Specifically sought to address noise in large feature spaces through the recursive elimination of features and the iterative application of ReliefF. === Evaporative Cooling ReliefF === Similarly seeking to address noise in large feature spaces. Utilized an iterative `evaporative' removal of lowest quality features using ReliefF scores in association with mutual information. === EReliefF (a.k.a. Extended ReliefF) === Addressing issues related to incomplete and multi-class data. === VLSReliefF (a.k.a. Very Large Scale ReliefF) === Dramatically improves the efficiency of detecting 2-way feature interactions in very large feature spaces by scoring random feature subsets rather than the entire feature space. === ReliefMSS === Introduced calculation of feature weights relative to average feature 'diff' between instance pairs. === SURF === SURF identifies nearest neighbors (both hits and misses) based on a distance threshold from the target instance defined by the average distance between all pairs of instances in the training data. Results suggest improved power to detect 2-way epistatic interactions over ReliefF. === SURF (a.k.a. SURFStar) === SURF extends the SURF algorithm to not only utilized 'near' neighbors in scoring updates, but 'far' instances as well, but employing inverted scoring updates for 'far instance pairs. Results suggest improved power to detect 2-way epistatic interactions over SURF, but an inability to detect simple main effects (i.e. univariate associations). === SWRF === SWRF extends the SURF algorithm adopting sigmoid weighting to take distance from the threshold into account. Also introduced a modular framework for further developing RBAs called MoRF. === MultiSURF (a.k.a. MultiSURFStar) === MultiSURF extends the SURF algorithm adapting the near/far neighborhood boundaries based on the average and standard deviation of distances from the target instance to all others. MultiSURF uses the standard deviation to define a dead-band zone where 'middle-distance' instances do not contribute to scoring. Evidence suggests MultiSURF performs best in detecting pure 2-way feature interactions. === Reli
Robust principal component analysis
Robust Principal Component Analysis (RPCA) is a modification of the widely used statistical procedure of principal component analysis (PCA) which works well with respect to grossly corrupted observations. A number of different approaches exist for Robust PCA, including an idealized version of Robust PCA, which aims to recover a low-rank matrix L0 from highly corrupted measurements M = L0 +S0. This decomposition in low-rank and sparse matrices can be achieved by techniques such as Principal Component Pursuit method (PCP), Stable PCP, Quantized PCP, Block based PCP, and Local PCP. Then, optimization methods are used such as the Augmented Lagrange Multiplier Method (ALM), Alternating Direction Method (ADM), Fast Alternating Minimization (FAM), Iteratively Reweighted Least Squares (IRLS ) or alternating projections (AP). == Algorithms == === Non-convex method === The 2014 guaranteed algorithm for the robust PCA problem (with the input matrix being M = L + S {\displaystyle M=L+S} ) is an alternating minimization type algorithm. The computational complexity is O ( m n r 2 log 1 ϵ ) {\displaystyle O\left(mnr^{2}\log {\frac {1}{\epsilon }}\right)} where the input is the superposition of a low-rank (of rank r {\displaystyle r} ) and a sparse matrix of dimension m × n {\displaystyle m\times n} and ϵ {\displaystyle \epsilon } is the desired accuracy of the recovered solution, i.e., ‖ L ^ − L ‖ F ≤ ϵ {\displaystyle \|{\widehat {L}}-L\|_{F}\leq \epsilon } where L {\displaystyle L} is the true low-rank component and L ^ {\displaystyle {\widehat {L}}} is the estimated or recovered low-rank component. Intuitively, this algorithm performs projections of the residual onto the set of low-rank matrices (via the SVD operation) and sparse matrices (via entry-wise hard thresholding) in an alternating manner - that is, low-rank projection of the difference the input matrix and the sparse matrix obtained at a given iteration followed by sparse projection of the difference of the input matrix and the low-rank matrix obtained in the previous step, and iterating the two steps until convergence. This alternating projections algorithm is later improved by an accelerated version, coined AccAltProj. The acceleration is achieved by applying a tangent space projection before projecting the residue onto the set of low-rank matrices. This trick improves the computational complexity to O ( m n r log 1 ϵ ) {\displaystyle O\left(mnr\log {\frac {1}{\epsilon }}\right)} with a much smaller constant in front while it maintains the theoretically guaranteed linear convergence. Another fast version of accelerated alternating projections algorithm is IRCUR. It uses the structure of CUR decomposition in alternating projections framework to dramatically reduces the computational complexity of RPCA to O ( max { m , n } r 2 log ( m ) log ( n ) log 1 ϵ ) {\displaystyle O\left(\max\{m,n\}r^{2}\log(m)\log(n)\log {\frac {1}{\epsilon }}\right)} === Convex relaxation === This method consists of relaxing the rank constraint r a n k ( L ) {\displaystyle rank(L)} in the optimization problem to the nuclear norm ‖ L ‖ ∗ {\displaystyle \|L\|_{}} and the sparsity constraint ‖ S ‖ 0 {\displaystyle \|S\|_{0}} to ℓ 1 {\displaystyle \ell _{1}} -norm ‖ S ‖ 1 {\displaystyle \|S\|_{1}} . The resulting program can be solved using methods such as the method of Augmented Lagrange Multipliers. === Deep-learning augmented method === Some recent works propose RPCA algorithms with learnable/training parameters. Such a learnable/trainable algorithm can be unfolded as a deep neural network whose parameters can be learned via machine learning techniques from a given dataset or problem distribution. The learned algorithm will have superior performance on the corresponding problem distribution. == Applications == RPCA has many real life important applications particularly when the data under study can naturally be modeled as a low-rank plus a sparse contribution. Following examples are inspired by contemporary challenges in computer science, and depending on the applications, either the low-rank component or the sparse component could be the object of interest: === Video surveillance === Given a sequence of surveillance video frames, it is often required to identify the activities that stand out from the background. If we stack the video frames as columns of a matrix M, then the low-rank component L0 naturally corresponds to the stationary background and the sparse component S0 captures the moving objects in the foreground. === Face recognition === Images of a convex, Lambertian surface under varying illuminations span a low-dimensional subspace. This is one of the reasons for effectiveness of low-dimensional models for imagery data. In particular, it is easy to approximate images of a human's face by a low-dimensional subspace. To be able to correctly retrieve this subspace is crucial in many applications such as face recognition and alignment. It turns out that RPCA can be applied successfully to this problem to exactly recover the face.
Blanking (video)
In analog video, blanking occurs between horizontal lines and between frames. In raster scan equipment, an image is built up by scanning an electron beam from left to right across a screen to produce a visible trace of one scan line, reducing the brightness of the beam to zero (horizontal blanking), moving it back as fast as possible to the left of the screen at a slightly lower position (the next scan line), restoring the brightness, and continuing until all the lines have been displayed and the beam is at the bottom right of the screen. Its intensity is then reduced to zero again (vertical blanking), and it is rapidly moved to the top left to start again, creating the next frame. In television, in particular, the vertical blanking interval is long to accommodate the slow equipment available at the time the standard was set. Fast modern electronics allows digital information to be encoded into the signal during the vertical blanking interval; it is not displayed on screen as the beam is blanked, but can be processed by appropriate circuitry.
Witness set
In combinatorics and computational learning theory, a witness set is a set of elements that distinguishes a given Boolean function from a given class of other Boolean functions. Let C {\displaystyle C} be a concept class over a domain X {\displaystyle X} (that is, a family of Boolean functions over X {\displaystyle X} ) and c {\displaystyle c} be a concept in X {\displaystyle X} (a single Boolean function). A subset S {\displaystyle S} of X {\displaystyle X} is a witness set for c {\displaystyle c} in X {\displaystyle X} if S {\displaystyle S} distinguishes c {\displaystyle c} from all the other functions in C {\displaystyle C} , in the sense that no other function in C {\displaystyle C} has the same values on S {\displaystyle S} . For a concept class with | C | {\displaystyle |C|} concepts, there exists a concept that has a witness of size at most log 2 | C | {\displaystyle \log _{2}|C|} ; this bound is tight when C {\displaystyle C} consists of all Boolean functions over X {\displaystyle X} . By a result of Bondy (1972) there exists a single witness set of size at most | C | − 1 {\displaystyle |C|-1} that is valid for all concepts in C {\displaystyle C} ; this bound is tight when C {\displaystyle C} consists of the indicator functions of the empty set and some singleton sets. One way to construct this set is to interpret the concepts as bitstrings, and the domain elements as positions in these bitstrings. Then the set of positions at which a trie of the bitstrings branches forms the desired witness set. This construction is central to the operation of the fusion tree data structure. The minimum size of a witness set for c {\displaystyle c} is called the witness size or specification number and is denoted by w C ( c ) {\displaystyle w_{C}(c)} . The value max { w C ( c ) : c ∈ C } {\displaystyle \max\{w_{C}(c):c\in C\}} is called the teaching dimension of C {\displaystyle C} . It represents the number of examples of a concept that need to be presented by a teacher to a learner, in the worst case, to enable the learner to determine which concept is being presented. Witness sets have also been called teaching sets, keys, specifying sets, or discriminants. The "witness set" terminology is from Kushilevitz et al. (1996), who trace the concept of witness sets to work by Cover (1965).