Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

T. Jeff Reynolds

dblp:65/167 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
7ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2007
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 2Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Automata and formal languages · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Automata and formal languages › grammatical inference
automata learning
0.112005
Learning Deterministic Finite Automata with a Smart State Labeling Evolutionary Algorithm · IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2005
Automata and formal languages › grammatical inference › automata learning
DFA learning
0.112005
Learning Deterministic Finite Automata with a Smart State Labeling Evolutionary Algorithm · IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2005
Automata and formal languages › grammatical inference
regular language learning
0.012005
Learning Deterministic Finite Automata with a Smart State Labeling Evolutionary Algorithm · IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2005

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

state labeling · 0.1evolutionary algorithm · 0.1evidence driven state merging · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2007 Learning Finite-State Transducers: Evolution Versus Heuristic State Merging
abstract
Finite-state transducers (FSTs) are finite-state machines (FSMs) that map strings in a source domain into strings in a target domain. While there are many reports in the literature of evolving FSMs, there has been much less work on evolving FSTs. In particular, the fitness functions required for evolving FSTs are generally different from those used for FSMs. In this paper, three string distance-based fitness functions are evaluated, in order of increasing computational complexity: string equality, Hamming distance, and edit distance. The fitness-distance correlation (FDC) and evolutionary performance of each fitness function is analyzed when used within a random mutation hill-climber (RMHC). Edit distance has the strongest FDC and also provides the best evolutionary performance, in that it is more likely to find the target FST within a given number of fitness function evaluations. Edit distance is also the most expensive to compute, but in most cases this extra computation is more than justified by its performance. The RMHC was compared with the best known heuristic method for learning FSTs, the onward subsequential transducer inference algorithm (OSTIA). On noise-free data, the RMHC performs best on problems with sparse training sets and small target machines. The RMHC and OSTIA offer similar performance for large target machines and denser data sets. When noise-corrupted data is used for training, the RMHC still performs well, while OSTIA performs poorly given even small amounts of noise. The RMHC is also shown to outperform a genetic algorithm. Hence, for certain classes of FST induction problem, the RMHC presented in this paper offers the best performance of any known algorithm
Simon M. Lucas, T. Jeff Reynolds
IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput.2
2005 Learning Deterministic Finite Automata with a Smart State Labeling Evolutionary Algorithm
abstract
Learning a Deterministic Finite Automaton (DFA) from a training set of labeled strings is a hard task that has been much studied within the machine learning community. It is equivalent to learning a regular language by example and has applications in language modeling. In this paper, we describe a novel evolutionary method for learning DFA that evolves only the transition matrix and uses a simple deterministic procedure to optimally assign state labels. We compare its performance with the Evidence Driven State Merging (EDSM) algorithm, one of the most powerful known DFA learning algorithms. We present results on random DFA induction problems of varying target size and training set density. We also studythe effects of noisy training data on the evolutionary approach and on EDSM. On noise-free data, we find that our evolutionary method outperforms EDSM on small sparse data sets. In the case of noisy training data, we find that our evolutionary method consistently outperforms EDSM, as well as other significant methods submitted to two recent competitions.
Simon M. Lucas, T. Jeff Reynolds
IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell.2
2003 Learning DFA: evolution versus evidence driven state merging
abstract
Learning deterministic finite automata (DFA) is a hard task that has been much studied within machine learning and evolutionary computation research. This paper presents a new method for evolving DFAs, where only the transition matrix is evolved, and the state labels are chosen to optimize the fit between final states and training set labels. This new procedure reduces the size and in particular, the complexity, of the search space. We present results on the Tomita languages, and also on a set of random DFA induction problems of varying target size and training set density. The Tomita set results show that we can learn the languages with far fewer fitness evaluations than previous evolutionary methods. On the random DFA task we compare our methods with the evidence driven state merging (EDSM) algorithms, which is one of the most powerful known DFA learning algorithms. We show that our method outperforms EDSM when the target DFA is small (less than 32 states) and the training set is sparse.
Simon M. Lucas, T. Jeff Reynolds
IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation2
2003 Experiments in speech recognition using a modular MLP architecture for acoustic modelling
T. Jeff Reynolds, Christos Andrea Antoniou
Inf. Sci.1
2000 Acoustic modelling using modular/ensemble combinations of heterogeneous neural networks
Christos Andrea Antoniou, T. Jeff Reynolds
INTERSPEECH2
2000 Modular neural networks exploit multiple front-ends to improve speech recognition systems
abstract
We have been investigating the possible advantages of a modular/ensemble neural network for acoustic modelling. We report experiments with ensembles of networks trained on data provided by different front-end preprocessing methods. As for previous work we train a network ensemble for each individual phone and combine the outputs of the ensemble using a further trained network. The combined system provides significant improvements for phone recognition and classification on the TIMIT corpus. Our results are now better than the best context-independent systems in the literature and close to the best context-dependent systems.
Christos Andrea Antoniou, T. Jeff Reynolds
KES2
1998 Initial speech recognition results using the multinet architecture
Ednaldo Brigante Pizzolato, T. Jeff Reynolds
ICSLP2