@inproceedings{10181, author = {{Nguyen, Vu-Linh and Destercke, Sebastian and Masson, M.-H. and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Proc. 27th Int.Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI)}}, pages = {{5089--5095}}, title = {{{Reliable Multi-class Classification based on Pairwise Epistemic and Aleatoric Uncertainty}}}, year = {{2018}}, } @inproceedings{10184, author = {{Schäfer, Dirk and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Proc. 21st Int. Conference on Discovery Science (DS)}}, pages = {{161--175}}, title = {{{Preference-Based Reinforcement Learning Using Dyad Ranking}}}, year = {{2018}}, } @article{10276, author = {{Schäfer, Dirk and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, journal = {{Machine Learning}}, number = {{5}}, pages = {{903--941}}, title = {{{Dyad Ranking Using Plackett-Luce Models based on joint feature representations}}}, volume = {{107}}, year = {{2018}}, } @inproceedings{1379, author = {{Seemann, Nina and Geierhos, Michaela and Merten, Marie-Luis and Tophinke, Doris and Wever, Marcel Dominik and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Postersession Computerlinguistik der 40. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft}}, editor = {{Eckart, Kerstin and Schlechtweg, Dominik }}, location = {{Stuttgart, Germany}}, title = {{{Supporting the Cognitive Process in Annotation Tasks}}}, year = {{2018}}, } @article{22996, abstract = {{The effective control design of a dynamical system traditionally relies on a high level of system understanding, usually expressed in terms of an exact physical model. In contrast to this, reinforcement learning adopts a data-driven approach and constructs an optimal control strategy by interacting with the underlying system. To keep the wear of real-world systems as low as possible, the learning process should be short. In our research, we used the state-of-the-art reinforcement learning method PILCO to design a feedback control strategy for the swing-up of the double pendulum on a cart with remarkably few test iterations at the test bench. PILCO stands for “probabilistic inference for learning control” and requires only few expert knowledge for learning. To achieve the swing-up of a double pendulum on a cart to its upper unstable equilibrium position, we introduce additional state restrictions to PILCO, so that the limited cart distance can be taken into account. Thanks to these measures, we were able to learn the swing up at the real test bench for the first time and in only 27 learning iterations.}}, author = {{Hesse, Michael and Timmermann, Julia and Hüllermeier, Eyke and Trächtler, Ansgar}}, journal = {{Procedia Manufacturing}}, pages = {{15 -- 20}}, title = {{{A Reinforcement Learning Strategy for the Swing-Up of the Double Pendulum on a Cart}}}, volume = {{24}}, year = {{2018}}, } @inproceedings{3325, author = {{Melnikov, Vitalik and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings. 27. Workshop Computational Intelligence, Dortmund, 23. - 24. November 2017}}, publisher = {{KIT Scientific Publishing}}, title = {{{Optimizing the Structure of Nested Dichotomies: A Comparison of Two Heuristics}}}, doi = {{10.5445/KSP/1000074341}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inproceedings{71, abstract = {{Today, software verification tools have reached the maturity to be used for large scale programs. Different tools perform differently well on varying code. A software developer is hence faced with the problem of choosing a tool appropriate for her program at hand. A ranking of tools on programs could facilitate the choice. Such rankings can, however, so far only be obtained by running all considered tools on the program.In this paper, we present a machine learning approach to predicting rankings of tools on programs. The method builds upon so-called label ranking algorithms, which we complement with appropriate kernels providing a similarity measure for programs. Our kernels employ a graph representation for software source code that mixes elements of control flow and program dependence graphs with abstract syntax trees. Using data sets from the software verification competition SV-COMP, we demonstrate our rank prediction technique to generalize well and achieve a rather high predictive accuracy (rank correlation > 0.6).}}, author = {{Czech, Mike and Hüllermeier, Eyke and Jakobs, Marie-Christine and Wehrheim, Heike}}, booktitle = {{Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Software Analytics}}, pages = {{23--26}}, title = {{{Predicting Rankings of Software Verification Tools}}}, doi = {{10.1145/3121257.3121262}}, year = {{2017}}, } @techreport{72, abstract = {{Software verification competitions, such as the annual SV-COMP, evaluate software verification tools with respect to their effectivity and efficiency. Typically, the outcome of a competition is a (possibly category-specific) ranking of the tools. For many applications, such as building portfolio solvers, it would be desirable to have an idea of the (relative) performance of verification tools on a given verification task beforehand, i.e., prior to actually running all tools on the task.In this paper, we present a machine learning approach to predicting rankings of tools on verification tasks. The method builds upon so-called label ranking algorithms, which we complement with appropriate kernels providing a similarity measure for verification tasks. Our kernels employ a graph representation for software source code that mixes elements of control flow and program dependence graphs with abstract syntax trees. Using data sets from SV-COMP, we demonstrate our rank prediction technique to generalize well and achieve a rather high predictive accuracy. In particular, our method outperforms a recently proposed feature-based approach of Demyanova et al. (when applied to rank predictions). }}, author = {{Czech, Mike and Hüllermeier, Eyke and Jakobs, Marie-Christine and Wehrheim, Heike}}, title = {{{Predicting Rankings of Software Verification Competitions}}}, year = {{2017}}, } @misc{10589, author = {{Fürnkranz, J. and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Encyclopedia of Machine Learning and Data Mining}}, pages = {{1000--1005}}, title = {{{Preference Learning}}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inbook{10784, author = {{Fürnkranz, J. and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Encyclopedia of Machine Learning and Data Mining}}, editor = {{Sammut, C. and Webb, G.I.}}, pages = {{1000--1005}}, publisher = {{Springer}}, title = {{{Preference Learning}}}, volume = {{107}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inproceedings{1180, abstract = {{These days, there is a strong rise in the needs for machine learning applications, requiring an automation of machine learning engineering which is referred to as AutoML. In AutoML the selection, composition and parametrization of machine learning algorithms is automated and tailored to a specific problem, resulting in a machine learning pipeline. Current approaches reduce the AutoML problem to optimization of hyperparameters. Based on recursive task networks, in this paper we present one approach from the field of automated planning and one evolutionary optimization approach. Instead of simply parametrizing a given pipeline, this allows for structure optimization of machine learning pipelines, as well. We evaluate the two approaches in an extensive evaluation, finding both approaches to have their strengths in different areas. Moreover, the two approaches outperform the state-of-the-art tool Auto-WEKA in many settings.}}, author = {{Wever, Marcel Dominik and Mohr, Felix and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{27th Workshop Computational Intelligence}}, location = {{Dortmund}}, title = {{{Automatic Machine Learning: Hierachical Planning Versus Evolutionary Optimization}}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inproceedings{15397, author = {{Melnikov, Vitaly and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{in Proceedings 27th Workshop Computational Intelligence, Dortmund Germany}}, editor = {{Hoffmann, F. and Hüllermeier, Eyke and Mikut, R.}}, pages = {{1--12}}, publisher = {{KIT Scientific Publishing}}, title = {{{Optimizing the structure of nested dichotomies. A comparison of two heuristics}}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inproceedings{15399, author = {{Czech, M. and Hüllermeier, Eyke and Jacobs, M.C. and Wehrheim, Heike}}, booktitle = {{in Proceedings ESEC/FSE Workshops 2017 - 3rd ACM SIGSOFT, International Workshop on Software Analytics (SWAN 2017), Paderborn Germany}}, title = {{{Predicting rankings of software verification tools}}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inproceedings{15110, author = {{Couso, Ines and Dubois, D. and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{in Proceedings SUM 2017, 11th International Conference on Scalable Uncertainty Management, Granada, Spain}}, pages = {{3--16}}, publisher = {{Springer}}, title = {{{Maximum likelihood estimation and coarse data}}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inproceedings{10204, author = {{Ewerth, Ralph and Springstein, M. and Müller, E. and Balz, A. and Gehlhaar, J. and Naziyok, T. and Dembczynski, K. and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Multimedia and Expo (ICME 2017)}}, pages = {{919--924}}, title = {{{Estimating relative depth in single images via rankboost}}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inproceedings{10205, author = {{Ahmadi Fahandar, Mohsen and Hüllermeier, Eyke and Couso, Ines}}, booktitle = {{Proc. 34th Int. Conf. on Machine Learning (ICML 2017)}}, pages = {{1078--1087}}, title = {{{Statistical Inference for Incomplete Ranking Data: The Case of Rank-Dependent Coarsening}}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inproceedings{10206, author = {{Mohr, Felix and Lettmann, Theodor and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Proc. 40th Annual German Conference on Advances in Artificial Intelligence (KI 2017)}}, pages = {{193--206}}, title = {{{Planning with Independent Task Networks}}}, doi = {{10.1007/978-3-319-67190-1_15}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inproceedings{10207, author = {{Czech, M. and Hüllermeier, Eyke and Jakobs, M.-C. and Wehrheim, Heike}}, booktitle = {{Proc. 3rd ACM SIGSOFT Int. I Workshop on Software Analytics (SWAN@ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2017}}, pages = {{23--26}}, title = {{{Predicting rankings of software verification tools}}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inproceedings{10208, author = {{Couso, Ines and Dubois, D. and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Proc. 11th Int. Conf. on Scalable Uncertainty Management (SUM 2017)}}, pages = {{3--16}}, title = {{{Maximum Likelihood Estimation and Coarse Data}}}, year = {{2017}}, } @inproceedings{10209, author = {{Ahmadi Fahandar, Mohsen and Hüllermeier, Eyke}}, booktitle = {{Proc. AAAI 2017, 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence}}, title = {{{Learning to Rank based on Analogical Reasoning}}}, year = {{2017}}, }