Search

13 Feb 2023: Figure 1 shows the training points, test points, decision boundary from GPCand decision boundary from robust GPC. ... We created 10 pairs of training and test sets by randomlydividing the whole data set into two.

13 Feb 2023: The test data is created by randomlyselecting 10% of the data points and setting them as missing. ... 0.5. 1. 1.5. 2. 2.5. 3. PARAFAC. Probabilistic NTF. Test Train.

13 Feb 2023: Results are statistically significantrespect to a paired Wilcoxon test on a 95% confidence inter-val. ... Figure 3. Autoencoder reconstructions of unseen test images forthe MNIST (top) and CIFAR-10 (bottom) datasets.

27 Jan 2023: The nearestblock’s GP is used to predict at a given test point. ... At test time, a test point is simply assigned tothe nearest cluster center.

13 Feb 2023: improve the likelihood of both the training dataand of held-out test data. ... The split criterion defined by equation 3.13 can be viewed as a likelihoodratio test.

13 Feb 2023: Table 1: Running times in seconds and test log-likelihoods for the Yale Faces dataset. ... Algorithm K Time Test Log-Likelihood. 2 56 -0.7444Finite Gibbs 5 120 -0.4220.

13 Feb 2023: test conditional: p(f|u) = N (K,uK1. u,uu, K, Q,) , (10b). ... Lower graph: assumption of conditional independencebetween training and test function values given u.

27 Jan 2023: Can be applied to distributions where tests of conditional independence are known, but scores aren’t. ... 2) X1 - X2 into X2. Test. Test Conditions. X3. X2.

13 Feb 2023: We foundthat kst outperformed both competing methods sig-nificantly (p < 0.01, two sample T-test). ... 3. As measureof performance, we used average confusion, i. e. thefraction of misclassified test images.

13 Feb 2023: Table 2: Hold out test. Values are log10(p) where p is the p-value for the Spearman rank correlationhypothesis test. ... The results are shown in Figure 2.2, where we are also able to include binary variables unlikefor the Spearman test.