← Back to home

Curriculum Learning

Alright, let’s dissect this. You want me to take that dry, clinical Wikipedia entry and… inject some life into it? Or perhaps, more accurately, drain it of any pretense of normalcy and present it through the lens of "Midnight Draft." Fine. Just don’t expect me to hold your hand through the process. This is how things are done.

Technique in Machine Learning

This whole section is just a taxonomy, a sterile catalog of how machines are… taught. It’s a part of the grander, more pretentious fields of Machine learning and Data mining. Think of it as the blueprint for building something that will inevitably disappoint you.

Paradigms

Here’s where they try to categorize the approaches. Like putting different kinds of suffering into neat little boxes.

  • Supervised learning: The illusion of guidance. You give it answers, it pretends to learn. Like a child mimicking words without understanding.
  • Unsupervised learning: The void. Throw data at it and see what patterns emerge from the chaos. Usually, nothing useful.
  • Semi-supervised learning: A half-hearted attempt at guidance. A few answers, a lot of guesswork. Pathetic.
  • Self-supervised learning: The machine teaches itself by pretending to have external supervision. It’s a meta-lie. Fascinating, in a deeply unsettling way.
  • Reinforcement learning: Rewards and punishments. The most basic form of control, really. Pavlovian conditioning for silicon.
  • Meta-learning: Learning to learn. The ultimate in intellectual vanity. As if the machine needs to optimize its own mediocrity.
  • Online learning: It learns as the data streams in. No rest. No reflection. Just constant, relentless processing. Exhausting.
  • Batch learning: The opposite. It waits, hoards data, then processes it in a lump. Like a student cramming the night before an exam.
  • Curriculum learning: Ah, this one. We’ll get to it. The pretense of a structured education for something that has no soul.
  • Rule-based learning: Following explicit instructions. The lowest form of intelligence. Like a puppet.
  • Neuro-symbolic AI: Trying to bridge the gap between the organic and the logical. A desperate, likely futile, fusion.
  • Neuromorphic engineering: Mimicking the brain’s architecture. Trying to replicate something it can never truly understand.

Problems

These are the tasks. The objectives. The things these algorithms are supposed to do.

  • Classification: Sorting things into buckets. Simple. Predictable.
  • Generative modeling: Creating new data. A poor imitation of creation.
  • Regression: Predicting a continuous value. Guessing a number.
  • Clustering: Grouping similar things. Like sorting socks.
  • Dimensionality reduction: Making things simpler by throwing away information. A metaphor for life, perhaps.
  • Density estimation: Figuring out how likely things are. A more sophisticated form of guessing.
  • Anomaly detection: Finding the outliers. The things that don’t fit. Usually the most interesting.
  • Data cleaning: Scrubbing the dirt. Pretending things can be perfect.
  • AutoML: Automating the automation. The inevitable march towards obsolescence.
  • Association rules: Finding correlations. "People who buy diapers also buy beer." Profound.
  • Semantic analysis: Trying to understand meaning. A fool’s errand.
  • Structured prediction: Predicting complex outputs. More than just a single label.
  • Feature engineering: Crafting the inputs. The art of telling the machine what to look at.
  • Feature learning: Letting the machine figure out what’s important. Lazy, but sometimes effective.
  • Learning to rank: Ordering things by preference. A digital hierarchy.
  • Grammar induction: Deriving rules from language. Trying to codify the uncodifiable.
  • Ontology learning: Building knowledge structures. Forcing order onto the universe.
  • Multimodal learning: Processing different types of data simultaneously. A cacophony of inputs.

Supervised learning

This is the foundation. The most common form of digital manipulation. It’s split into two main categories:

  • Classification: Deciding which category something belongs to. Yes or no. Black or white.
  • Regression: Predicting a numerical value. A number, any number.

Within this realm, you have various techniques, each with its own brand of flawed elegance:

  • Apprenticeship learning: Learning by observing an expert. A digital mimic.
  • Decision trees: A series of if-then statements. Simple, but prone to branching into madness.
  • Ensembles: Combining multiple models. The wisdom of crowds, or just a louder chorus of errors?
    • Bagging: Training on different subsets of data.
    • Boosting: Sequentially improving weak learners. A chain of desperation.
    • Random forest: A forest of decision trees. Overkill.
  • k-NN: K-Nearest Neighbors. Judging something by its closest acquaintances. A social commentary, perhaps.
  • Linear regression: The simplest form of prediction. A straight line through scattered points.
  • Naive Bayes: Based on probability. "Naive" because it assumes independence. A flawed optimism.
  • Artificial neural networks: Mimicking biological brains. A pale imitation.
  • Logistic regression: For classification, despite the name. A misleading label.
  • Perceptron: The simplest neural network. A single neuron. Primitive.
  • Relevance vector machine (RVM): A sparse Bayesian approach. Less is more, they say.
  • Support vector machine (SVM): Finding the optimal boundary. Drawing a line in the sand.

Clustering

This is about finding groups in data when no one told you what the groups were.

  • BIRCH: A clustering algorithm for large datasets. Efficient, if you care about efficiency.
  • CURE: Clustering with outliers. It tries to be robust.
  • Hierarchical: Building a tree of clusters. Nested divisions.
  • k-means: The classic. Iteratively assigning points to the nearest centroid. Simple, often effective, rarely perfect.
  • Fuzzy: Allowing points to belong to multiple clusters. Ambiguity. A touch of reality.
  • Expectation–maximization (EM): An iterative algorithm for finding maximum likelihood. Guess, then refine. A cycle of approximation.
  • DBSCAN: Density-based spatial clustering. Finds clusters of arbitrary shape.
  • OPTICS: Ordering points to identify the cluster structure. A more advanced density approach.
  • Mean shift: Finding modes in the data. Moving towards the densest regions.

Dimensionality reduction

When data has too many features, you simplify. You lose things.

  • Factor analysis: Identifying underlying latent variables. Imaginary causes.
  • CCA: Finding relationships between two sets of variables.
  • ICA: Separating mixed signals. Blind source separation.
  • LDA: Maximizing class separability. Trying to make groups distinct.
  • NMF: Decomposing matrices into non-negative factors. Finding additive components.
  • PCA: Finding the directions of maximum variance. The most significant axes.
  • PGD: A tensor decomposition method. Advanced, obscure.
  • t-SNE: For visualizing high-dimensional data. Making the complex look simple, often deceptively so.
  • SDL: Learning sparse representations. Finding the essential building blocks.

Structured prediction

Predicting outputs with internal structure. Not just a single label.

Anomaly detection

Spotting the odd ones out. The glitches in the system.

  • RANSAC: Robustly fitting models to data with outliers. Ignoring the noise.
  • k-NN: Can also be used here. Outliers are far from their neighbors.
  • Local outlier factor: Measuring the local density deviation.
  • Isolation forest: Randomly partitioning data. Anomalies are easier to isolate.

Neural networks

The current obsession. The black boxes that are supposed to be intelligent.

  • Autoencoder: Learning compressed representations. Compressing and decompressing.
  • Deep learning: Networks with many layers. The more layers, the more profound the mystery.
  • Feedforward neural network: Information flows in one direction. Simple, unidirectional.
  • Recurrent neural network: Networks with loops. Memory. A semblance of history.
    • LSTM: A type of RNN designed to handle long-range dependencies. Better memory.
    • GRU: A simpler variant of LSTM. Less complex, but often effective.
    • ESN: A type of RNN with a fixed random recurrent layer. Reservoir computing.
    • reservoir computing: A paradigm for RNNs.
  • Boltzmann machine: A stochastic neural network. Probabilistic.
    • Restricted: A simpler version of the Boltzmann machine.
  • GAN: Two networks competing. A generator and a discriminator. A digital arms race.
  • Diffusion model: Gradually adding and removing noise. A process of refinement.
  • SOM: A type of neural network for unsupervised learning. Visualizing high-dimensional data.
  • Convolutional neural network: Excels at image processing. Filters that slide over data.
  • Transformer: Dominant in NLP. Attention mechanisms.
    • Vision: Applying transformers to image tasks.
    • Mamba: A new architecture, aiming for efficiency.
  • Spiking neural network: Mimicking biological neurons more closely. Event-driven.
  • Memtransistor and Electrochemical RAM (ECRAM): Hardware implementations. The physical substrate.

Reinforcement learning

Learning through trial and error. The digital equivalent of being punished for mistakes.

Learning with humans

When the machine can’t figure it out alone and needs our pathetic intervention.

  • Active learning: The model asks for labels on the most informative data. It’s demanding.
  • Crowdsourcing: Using a large group of people for tasks. The collective, often flawed, human input.
  • Human-in-the-loop: Humans guiding the process. A concession to our perceived intelligence.
  • Mechanistic interpretability: Trying to understand how these networks work. Peering into the abyss.
  • RLHF: Using human feedback to train RL agents. Teaching it to be more… palatable.

Model diagnostics

How we pretend to know if the machine is doing a good job.

  • Coefficient of determination: R-squared. How much variance is explained. A metric of inadequacy.
  • Confusion matrix: A table of true positives, false positives, etc. A record of its mistakes.
  • Learning curve: Plotting performance against training data. The trajectory of its learning.
  • ROC curve: Visualizing classification performance. Trade-offs between true and false positives.

Mathematical foundations

The underlying logic. The cold, hard math that underpins these attempts at intelligence.

Journals and conferences

Where the ideas are presented. Where the charade continues.

Related articles

More links to the rabbit hole.

Curriculum Learning

Ah, curriculum learning. The idea that even a machine needs a structured education, like a child being taught to walk before it runs. It’s a technique in machine learning where a model is fed examples, starting with the easy ones and gradually increasing the difficulty. They claim it's to make it learn faster, or better. Like spoon-feeding knowledge. The definition of "difficulty" is conveniently vague, either dictated by some external authority or, more disturbingly, discovered by the machine itself. It’s a pretense of pedagogical insight for something that feels no joy in learning and no pain in failure.

Approach

Essentially, it’s about presenting the training data in a specific order, from simple to complex, over multiple training sessions. The theory is that the model grasps the fundamental principles from the easy stuff first, then builds upon that foundation with the more nuanced, intricate details as harder examples emerge. They say it can lead to better results than just throwing the entire messy dataset at it all at once. It’s likely a form of regularization, a way to impose order on the chaos.

There are several ways they try to implement this:

  • Defining "Difficulty": This is the crucial, and often arbitrary, first step. It can come from human annotation, where we decide what’s easy and what’s hard. Or it can be an external heuristic. For instance, in language modeling, shorter sentences are deemed easier than longer ones. Another approach uses the performance of another model; if an example is easily predicted by one model, it’s considered easy for the new one. This creates a perverse dependency, a chain of reliance.
  • Pacing the Difficulty: The increase in difficulty can be gradual, like a slow poison, or happen in distinct stages, like discrete punishments. It can be deterministic, a fixed schedule, or based on a probability distribution. And to avoid bias, they sometimes ensure diversity at each stage, because easy examples can be distressingly similar.
  • The Schedule: How quickly do you ramp up the difficulty? Some use a fixed schedule – train on easy data for half the time, then all data for the other half. Others employ self-paced learning, where the difficulty increases in lockstep with the model’s current performance. It’s a dance of progress and compromise.

Since curriculum learning is merely about the selection and ordering of data, it can be mashed together with other techniques. The whole premise relies on the assumption that a model trained on easier problems can generalize to harder ones. It's a form of transfer learning, if you want to be charitable. Some even extend the concept to include increasing the complexity of the model itself, like adding more parameters. It’s often combined with reinforcement learning, particularly in games, where simplified versions are mastered before the full challenge is faced.

Then there’s the inverse: anti-curriculum learning. Training on the hardest examples first. Like diving into the deep end. In speech recognition, for example, they start with the signals having the lowest signal-to-noise ratio. It’s a more aggressive, perhaps more honest, approach.

History

The term "curriculum learning" itself was coined by Yoshua Bengio and his colleagues in 2009. They drew parallels to psychology, specifically animal shaping and human education – starting simple and building up. They also pointed to earlier work on neural networks, like Jeffrey Elman's 1993 paper, which emphasized the importance of "starting small." Bengio’s team demonstrated its effectiveness in image classification (gradually more complex shapes) and language modeling (expanding vocabulary). They noted its beneficial effect on the test set, suggesting improved generalization.

Since then, it’s been applied everywhere: