Constraint Reasoning and Kernel Clustering for Pattern Decomposition With Scaling

Similar documents
A Computational Challenge Problem in Materials Discovery: Synthetic Problem Generator and Real-World Datasets

MultiscaleMaterialsDesignUsingInformatics. S. R. Kalidindi, A. Agrawal, A. Choudhary, V. Sundararaghavan AFOSR-FA

Salt Dome Detection and Tracking Using Texture Analysis and Tensor-based Subspace Learning

Secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS)

Course in Data Science

Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning

Gravitational Wave Astronomy s Next Frontier in Computation

CS264: Beyond Worst-Case Analysis Lecture #15: Topic Modeling and Nonnegative Matrix Factorization

Ichiro Takeuchi University of Maryland

Combinatorial Heterogeneous Catalysis

CS 6375 Machine Learning

Deep learning / Ian Goodfellow, Yoshua Bengio and Aaron Courville. - Cambridge, MA ; London, Spis treści

L 2,1 Norm and its Applications

Clustering based tensor decomposition

CS 2750: Machine Learning. Bayesian Networks. Prof. Adriana Kovashka University of Pittsburgh March 14, 2016

Overview of Statistical Tools. Statistical Inference. Bayesian Framework. Modeling. Very simple case. Things are usually more complicated

9/12/17. Types of learning. Modeling data. Supervised learning: Classification. Supervised learning: Regression. Unsupervised learning: Clustering

CS598 Machine Learning in Computational Biology (Lecture 5: Matrix - part 2) Professor Jian Peng Teaching Assistant: Rongda Zhu

Provable Alternating Minimization Methods for Non-convex Optimization

Experimental Design and Data Analysis for Biologists

Matrices, Vector Spaces, and Information Retrieval

Memory Efficient Kernel Approximation

Spectral Clustering of Polarimetric SAR Data With Wishart-Derived Distance Measures

Characterization and inference of weighted graph topologies from observations of diffused signals

Visual Tracking via Geometric Particle Filtering on the Affine Group with Optimal Importance Functions

Machine Learning. Principal Components Analysis. Le Song. CSE6740/CS7641/ISYE6740, Fall 2012

From perceptrons to word embeddings. Simon Šuster University of Groningen

Linear Regression. CSL603 - Fall 2017 Narayanan C Krishnan

EE 527 MICROFABRICATION. Lecture 24 Tai-Chang Chen University of Washington

Linear Regression. CSL465/603 - Fall 2016 Narayanan C Krishnan

Probabilistic Machine Learning. Industrial AI Lab.

Direct MOND/TEVES test with LISA Pathfinder

Principal Component Analysis

Combinatorial RF Magnetron Sputtering for Rapid Materials Discovery: Methodology and Applications

Simulations of the Microbunching Instability in FEL Beam Delivery Systems

Bayesian Support Vector Machines for Feature Ranking and Selection

Leveraging Belief Propagation, Backtrack Search, and Statistics for Model Counting

Uncertainty Quantification for Machine Learning and Statistical Models

Collaborative Filtering

Artificial Neural Networks

Gaussian Process Approximations of Stochastic Differential Equations

Introduction to Machine Learning

A short introduction to supervised learning, with applications to cancer pathway analysis Dr. Christina Leslie

FINDING DESCRIPTORS USEFUL FOR DATA MINING IN THE CHARACTERIZATION DATA OF CATALYSTS

A Modular NMF Matching Algorithm for Radiation Spectra

Numerical Solutions of Partial Differential Equations

Computational Materials Design and Discovery Energy and Electronic Applications Synthesis Structure Properties

Three right directions and three wrong directions for tensor research

Deep Learning for Natural Language Processing. Sidharth Mudgal April 4, 2017

Recent Advances in Bayesian Inference Techniques

Machine Learning. Lecture 4: Regularization and Bayesian Statistics. Feng Li.

Matrix and Tensor Factorization from a Machine Learning Perspective

Linear Regression. Aarti Singh. Machine Learning / Sept 27, 2010

Phonon calculations with SCAN

Structured tensor missing-trace interpolation in the Hierarchical Tucker format Curt Da Silva and Felix J. Herrmann Sept. 26, 2013

Sound Recognition in Mixtures

Machine Learning and Logic: Fast and Slow Thinking

Matrix Factorization Techniques for Recommender Systems

a Short Introduction

Introduction to Machine Learning. Introduction to ML - TAU 2016/7 1

DATA ANALYTICS IN NANOMATERIALS DISCOVERY

Modeling and Computation Core (MCC)

Applying Latent Dirichlet Allocation to Group Discovery in Large Graphs

CS 188: Artificial Intelligence Spring Announcements

Novel spectrum sensing schemes for Cognitive Radio Networks

Nonparametric Bayesian Methods (Gaussian Processes)

A DIVISION OF ULVAC-PHI

Outline Introduction OLS Design of experiments Regression. Metamodeling. ME598/494 Lecture. Max Yi Ren

Michael Lechner Causal Analysis RDD 2014 page 1. Lecture 7. The Regression Discontinuity Design. RDD fuzzy and sharp

PATTERN RECOGNITION AND MACHINE LEARNING

Instance-based Learning CE-717: Machine Learning Sharif University of Technology. M. Soleymani Fall 2016

Present status and future of DC photoemission electron guns for high power, high brightness applications

MACHINE LEARNING. Methods for feature extraction and reduction of dimensionality: Probabilistic PCA and kernel PCA

Lecture 24: Principal Component Analysis. Aykut Erdem May 2016 Hacettepe University

Non-Negative Matrix Factorization

Computer Vision Group Prof. Daniel Cremers. 14. Clustering

Machine Learning: Basis and Wavelet 김화평 (CSE ) Medical Image computing lab 서진근교수연구실 Haar DWT in 2 levels

Bayesian Identity Clustering

Study of the decays at Wasa-at-COSY. Elisabetta Prencipe on behalf of the Wasa Collaboration MesonNet Workshop, 17th -19th June 2013, Praha

An overview of word2vec

Machine Learning - MT & 14. PCA and MDS

CS6375: Machine Learning Gautam Kunapuli. Support Vector Machines

Matrix Factorization & Latent Semantic Analysis Review. Yize Li, Lanbo Zhang

Lecture: Local Spectral Methods (1 of 4)

Machine Learning (CS 567) Lecture 5

CS534 Machine Learning - Spring Final Exam

L11: Pattern recognition principles

MS482 Materials Characterization ( 재료분석 ) Lecture Note 5: RBS

MS482 Materials Characterization ( 재료분석 ) Lecture Note 4: XRF

ROBERTO BATTITI, MAURO BRUNATO. The LION Way: Machine Learning plus Intelligent Optimization. LIONlab, University of Trento, Italy, Apr 2015

ECE521 week 3: 23/26 January 2017

Approximate Inference Part 1 of 2

Latest advances in identifying mineral composition variation by the M4 TORNADO AMICS

Feature Engineering, Model Evaluations

Remote Access to Hi-tech Equipment

Bayesian Machine Learning

CSC411: Final Review. James Lucas & David Madras. December 3, 2018

The design of an integrated XPS/Raman spectroscopy instrument for co-incident analysis

Inmaculada Rodríguez Ramos Nanostructured catalysts for sustainable chemical processes

DISCRIMINATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF UNEXPLODED ORDINANCES (UXO) USING AIRBORNE MAGNETIC GRADIENTS

Transcription:

Constraint Reasoning and Kernel Clustering for Pattern Decomposition With Scaling Ronan LeBras Theodoros Damoulas Ashish Sabharwal Carla P. Gomes John M. Gregoire Bruce van Dover Computer Science Computer Science Computer Science Computer Science Materials Science / Physics Materials Science / Physics Sept 15, 2011 CP 11

Motivation Cornell Fuel Cell Institute Mission: develop new materials for fuel cells. An Electrocatalyst must: 1) Be electronically conducting 2) Facilitate both reactions Platinum is the best known metal to fulfill that role, but: 1) The reaction rate is still considered slow (causing energy loss) 2) Platinum is fairly costly, intolerant to fuel contaminants, and has a short lifetime. Goal: Find an intermetallic compound that is a better catalyst than Pt. 2

Motivation Recipe for finding alternatives to Platinum 1) In a vacuum chamber, place a silicon wafer. 2) Add three metals. 3) Mix until smooth, using three sputter guns. 4) Bake for 2 hours at 650ºC Rh Deliberately inhomogeneous composition on Si wafer (38% Ta, 45% Rh, 17% Pd) Atoms are intimately mixed [Source: Pyrotope, Sebastien Merkel] Ta Pd 3

Motivation Identifying crystal structure using X-Ray Diffraction at CHESS XRD pattern characterizes the underlying crystal fairly well Expensive experimentations: Bruce van Dover s research team has access to the facility one week every year. Rh 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 [Source: Pyrotope, Sebastien Merkel] (38% Ta, 45% Rh, 17% Pd) Ta Pd 4

Motivation Rh γ β α Ta Pd δ 5

Motivation Rh γ β γ+δ α+β Ta α δ Pd 6

Motivation Rh γ β α Ta Pd δ 7

Motivation 120 100 80 60 Rh γ 40 20 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 120 100 80 60 40 20 β P j 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 P i α+β Ta α Pd δ 8

Motivation 120 100 80 Rh γ 60 40 20 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 β P k 120 100 80 60 P j α+β 40 20 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Ta α P i Pd δ 9

120 100 80 60 40 20 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 120 100 80 60 40 20 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 0 Motivation INPUT: Al OUTPUT: m phase regions k pure regions m-k mixed regions Al pure phase region Mixed phase region Fe Si XRD pattern characterizing pure phases Fe Si Additional Physical characteristics: Peaks shift by 15% within a region Phase Connectivity Mixtures of 3 phases Small peaks might be discriminative Peak locations matter, more than peak intensities 10

Motivation Rh Ta Pd Figure 1: Phase regions of Ta-Rh-Pd Figure 2: Fluorescence activity of Ta-Rh-Pd 11

Outline Motivation Problem Definition Abstraction Hardness CP Model Kernel-based Clustering Bridging CP and Machine learning Conclusion and Future work 12

Problem Abstraction: Pattern Decomposition with Scaling Input Output 13

Problem Abstraction: Pattern Decomposition with Scaling Input Output v 1 v 2 v 3 v 4 v 5 14

Problem Abstraction: Pattern Decomposition with Scaling Input Output v 1 P 1 v 2 P 2 v 3 P 3 v 4 P 4 v 5 P 5 15

Problem Abstraction: Pattern Decomposition with Scaling Input Output v 1 P 1 v 2 P 2 v 3 P 3 v 4 P 4 v 5 P 5 M= K = 2, δ = 1.5 16

Problem Abstraction: Pattern Decomposition with Scaling Input Output B 1 v 1 P 1 v 2 P 2 v 3 P 3 v 4 P 4 v 5 P 5 M= K = 2, δ = 1.5 B 2 17

Problem Abstraction: Pattern Decomposition with Scaling Input Output v 1 P 1 B 1 s 11=1.00 s 21 =0.68 v 2 P 2 s 12 =0.95 s 22 =0.78 v 3 P 3 s 13 =0.88 s 23 =0.85 v 4 P 4 s 14 =0.84 s 24 =0.96 v 5 P 5 s 15 =0 s 25 =1.00 M= K = 2, δ = 1.5 B 2 18

Problem Hardness Assumptions: Each B k appears by itself in some v i / No experimental noise The problem can be solved* in polynomial time. Assumption: No experimental noise The problem becomes NP-hard (reduction from the Set Basis problem) v 1 v 2 v 3 v 4 v 5 Assumption used in this work: Experimental noise in the form of missing elements in P i P 0 = B 1 s 11=1.00 P 1 P 2 P 3 P 4 P 5 s 12 =0.95 s 13 =0.88 s 14 =0.84 s 15 =0 s 21 =0.68 s 22 =0.78 s 23 =0.85 s 24 =0.96 s 25 =1.00 M= K = 2, δ = 1.5 B 2 19

Outline Motivation Problem Definition CP Model Model Experimental Results Kernel-based Clustering Bridging CP and Machine learning Conclusion and Future work 20

CP Model 21

CP Model (continued) Advantage: Captures physical properties and relies on peak location rather than height. Drawback: Does not scale to realistic instances; poor propagation if experimental noise. 22

Running time (in s) CP Model Experimental Results 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Number of unknown phases vs. running times (AlLiFe with P = 24) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Number of unknown phases (K ) N=10 N=15 N=28 N=218 For realistic instances, K = 6 and N 218... 23

Outline Motivation Problem Definition CP Model Kernel-based Clustering Bridging CP and Machine learning Conclusion and Future work 24

Kernel-based Clustering Set of features: X = Similarity matrices: [X.X T ] + + Better approach: take shifts into account + Red: similar Blue: dissimilar Method: K-means on Dynamic Time-Warping kernel Goal: Select groups of samples that belong to the same phase region to feed the CP model, in order to extract the underlying phases of these sub-problems. 25

Bridging CP and ML Goal: a robust, physically meaningful, scalable, automated solution method that combines: Underlying Physics A language for Constraints enforcing local details Machine Learning for a global data-driven view Constraint Programming model Similarity Kernels & Clustering 26

Bridging Constraint Reasoning and Machine Learning: Overview of the Methodology 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 INPUT: Al Machine Learning: Fe Si Kernel methods, Dynamic Time Wrapping Peak detection Fix errors in data Machine Learning: Partial Clustering Al Full CP Model guided by partial solutions CP Model & Solver on sub-problems Fe Si OUTPUT only only, +, 27

Experimental Validation Al-Li-Fe instance with 6 phases: Ground truth (known) Previous work (NMF) violates many physical requirements Our CP + ML hybrid approach is much more robust 28

Conclusion Hybrid approach to clustering under constraints More robust than data-driven global ML approaches More scalable than a pure CP model locally enforcing constraints An exciting application in close collaboration with physicists Best inference out of expensive experiments Towards the design of better fuel cell technology 29

Future work Ongoing work: Spatial Clustering, to further enhance cluster quality Bayesian Approach, to better exploit prior knowledge about local smoothness and available inorganic libraries Active learning: Where to sample next, assuming we can interfere with the sampling process? When to stop sampling if sufficient information has been obtained? Correlating catalytic properties across many thin-films: In order to understand the underlying physical mechanism of catalysis and to find promising intermettalic compounds 30

The end Thank you! 31

Extra slides 32

Experimental Sample Example on Al-Li-Fe diagram: 33

Applications with similar structure Fire Detection Detecting/Locating fires. Flight Calls / Bird conservation Analogy: basis pattern = warmth sources samples = temperature recordings physical constraints = gradient of temperatures, material properties Identifying bird population from sound recordings at night. Analogy: basis pattern = species samples = recordings physical constraints = spatial constraints, species and season specificities 34

Previous Work 1: Cluster Analysis (Long et al., 2007) x i = (Feature vector) (Pearson correlation coefficients) (Distance matrix) (PCA 3 dimensional approx) (Hierarchical Agglomerative Clustering) Drawback: Requires sampling of pure phases, detects phase regions (not phases), overlooks peak shifts, may violate physical constraints (phase continuity, etc.). 35

Previous Work 2: NMF (Long et al., 2009) x i = X = A.S + E Min E (Feature vector) (Linear positive combination (A) of basis patterns (S)) (Minimizing squared Frobenius norm Drawback: Overlooks peak shifts (linear combination only), may violate physical constraints (phase continuity, etc.). 36