Search

Domain adaptation has become a prominent problem setting in machine learning and related fields. This review asks the question: how can a classifier learn from a source domain and generalize to a target domain? We present a categorization of approaches, divided into, what we refer to as, sample-based, feature-based and inference-based methods. Sample-based methods focus on weighting individual observations during training based on their importance to the target domain. Feature-based methods revolve around on mapping, projecting and representing features such that a source classifier performs well on the target domain and inference-based methods incorporate adaptation into the parameter estimation procedure, for instance through constraints on the optimization procedure. Additionally, we review a number of conditions that allow for formulating bounds on the cross-domain generalization error. Our categorization highlights recurring ideas and raises questions important to further research., Comment: 20 pages, 5 figures

Generalization of voxelwise classifiers is hampered by differences between MRI-scanners, e.g. different acquisition protocols and field strengths. To address this limitation, we propose a Siamese neural network (MRAI-NET) that extracts acquisition-invariant feature vectors. These can consequently be used by task-specific methods, such as voxelwise classifiers for tissue segmentation. MRAI-NET is tested on both simulated and real patient data. Experiments show that MRAI-NET outperforms voxelwise classifiers trained on the source or target scanner data when a small number of labeled samples is available., 3 figures, submitted to International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging 2019

Suppose one is faced with the challenge of tissue segmentation in MR images, without annotators at their center to provide labeled training data. One option is to go to another medical center for a trained classifier. Sadly, tissue classifiers do not generalize well across centers due to voxel intensity shifts caused by center-specific acquisition protocols. However, certain aspects of segmentations, such as spatial smoothness, remain relatively consistent and can be learned separately. Here we present a smoothness prior that is fit to segmentations produced at another medical center. This informative prior is presented to an unsupervised Bayesian model. The model clusters the voxel intensities, such that it produces segmentations that are similarly smooth to those of the other medical center. In addition, the unsupervised Bayesian model is extended to a semi-supervised variant, which needs no visual interpretation of clusters into tissues., Comment: 12 pages, 2 figures, 1 table. Accepted to the International Conference on Information Processing in Medical Imaging (2019)

Cross-validation under sample selection bias can, in principle, be done by importance-weighting the empirical risk. However, the importance-weighted risk estimator produces sub-optimal hyperparameter estimates in problem settings where large weights arise with high probability. We study its sampling variance as a function of the training data distribution and introduce a control variate to increase its robustness to problematically large weights., 6 pages, 8 figures, Accepted to the IEEE International Workshop on Machine Learning for Signal Processing 2019

Importance-weighting is a popular and well-researched technique for dealing with sample selection bias and covariate shift. It has desirable characteristics such as unbiasedness, consistency and low computational complexity. However, weighting can have a detrimental effect on an estimator as well. In this work, we empirically show that the sampling distribution of an importance-weighted estimator can be skewed. For sample selection bias settings, and for small sample sizes, the importance-weighted risk estimator produces overestimates for datasets in the body of the sampling distribution, i.e. the majority of cases, and large underestimates for data sets in the tail of the sampling distribution. These over- and underestimates of the risk lead to suboptimal regularization parameters when used for importance-weighted validation., Comment: Conference paper, 6 pages, 5 figures

This paper identifies a problem with the usual procedure for L2-regularization parameter estimation in a domain adaptation setting. In such a setting, there are differences between the distributions generating the training data (source domain) and the test data (target domain). The usual cross-validation procedure requires validation data, which can not be obtained from the unlabeled target data. The problem is that if one decides to use source validation data, the regularization parameter is underestimated. One possible solution is to scale the source validation data through importance weighting, but we show that this correction is not sufficient. We conclude the paper with an empirical analysis of the effect of several importance weight estimators on the estimation of the regularization parameter., 6 pages, 2 figures, 2 tables. Accepted to ICPR 2016