The Lucy–Hook coaddition method is an image processing technique for combining sub-stepped astronomical image data onto a finer grid. The method allows the option of resolution and contrast enhancement or the choice of a conservative, re-convolved, output. Tests with very deep Hubble Space Telescope Wide Field and Planetary Camera 2 (WFPC2) imaging data of excellent quality show that these methods can be very effective and allow fine-scale features to be studied better than on the unprocessed images. The Lucy–Hook coaddition method is an extension of the standard Richardson–Lucy deconvolution iterative restoration method. For many purposes it may be more convenient to combine dithered datasets using the Drizzle method.
Reconstruction from projections
The problem of reconstructing a multidimensional signal from its projection is uniquely multidimensional, having no 1-D counterpart. It has applications that range from computer-aided tomography to geophysical signal processing. It is a problem which can be explored from several points of view—as a deconvolution problem, a modeling problem, an estimation problem, or an interpolation problem. == Motivation and applications == Many fields in science and engineering use reconstruction from projections, especially in imaging. It is widely applied geophysical tomography, medical imaging and industrial radiography. For example, in a CT scanner, the 3D structure of the patient’s body being scanned is measured with beams going through the tissue and hitting a detector, giving a flat projection of the body from that angle. Multiple projections are put together to get an image of the position and shape of structures inside in 3D. == Problem statement and basics == A projection is a linear mapping of an M {\displaystyle M} dimensional signal into an N {\displaystyle N} dimensional one, where N ≤ M {\displaystyle N\leq M} . And the objective of reconstruction is to restore the M {\displaystyle M} dimensional signal based on the N {\displaystyle N} dimensional signal. The following case is a 2-D signal projected into 1D signal. The signal in the original coordinate is denoted as d ( u , v ) {\displaystyle d(u,v)} . Now consider a collimated beam of radiation coming from the opposite orientation of v ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {v}}} , producing a projection along u ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}} . v ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {v}}} and u ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}} are normal to each other, and the angle between u {\displaystyle u} and u ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}} is theta. The signal obtained along u ^ {\displaystyle {\hat {u}}} axis is defined to be p θ ( u ^ ) {\displaystyle p_{\theta }({\hat {u}})} . The relationship between the original coordinate and the rotated coordinate is given by [ u ^ v ^ ] = [ cos θ sin θ − sin θ cos θ ] [ u v ] {\displaystyle {\begin{bmatrix}{\hat {u}}\\{\hat {v}}\end{bmatrix}}={\begin{bmatrix}\cos \theta &\sin \theta \\-\sin \theta &\cos \theta \end{bmatrix}}{\begin{bmatrix}u\\v\end{bmatrix}}} or inversely, [ u v ] = [ cos θ − sin θ sin θ cos θ ] [ u ^ v ^ ] {\displaystyle {\begin{bmatrix}u\\v\end{bmatrix}}={\begin{bmatrix}\cos \theta &-\sin \theta \\\sin \theta &\cos \theta \end{bmatrix}}{\begin{bmatrix}{\hat {u}}\\{\hat {v}}\end{bmatrix}}} Then we have p θ ( u ^ ) = ∫ − ∞ ∞ d ( u , v ) d v ^ = ∫ − ∞ ∞ d ( u ^ cos ( θ ) − v ^ sin ( θ ) , u ^ sin ( θ ) + v ^ cos ( θ ) ) d v ^ {\displaystyle p_{\theta }({\hat {u}})=\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }d(u,v)\,\mathrm {d} {\hat {v}}=\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }d({\hat {u}}\cos(\theta )-{\hat {v}}\sin(\theta ),{\hat {u}}\sin(\theta )+{\hat {v}}\cos(\theta ))\,\mathrm {d} {\hat {v}}} By varying theta, a large number of projections can be obtained. Given the projection-slice theorem, D ( Ω , θ ) {\displaystyle D(\Omega ,\theta )} ,the slice of the Fourier transform of d ( u , v ) {\displaystyle d(u,v)} at angle theta, is equivalent to P θ ( Ω ) {\displaystyle P_{\theta }(\Omega )} , the Fourier Transform of the projection p θ ( u ^ ) {\displaystyle p_{\theta }({\hat {u}})} . Therefore, the unknown d ( u , v ) {\displaystyle d(u,v)} can be obtained from its Fourier transform by means of the Fourier transform inversion integral d ( u , v ) = 1 4 π 2 ∫ − ∞ ∞ ∫ − ∞ ∞ D ( Ω 1 , Ω 2 ) e j Ω 1 u e j Ω 2 v d Ω 1 , Ω 2 {\displaystyle \mathrm {d} (u,v)={\frac {1}{4\pi ^{2}}}\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }D(\Omega _{1},\Omega _{2})e^{j\Omega _{1}u}e^{j\Omega _{2}v}\,\mathrm {d} \Omega _{1},\Omega _{2}} = 1 4 π 2 ∫ 0 ∞ ∫ − π π D ( Ω , θ ) e j Ω u cos ( θ ) e j Ω v s i n θ | Ω | d Ω d θ {\displaystyle ={\frac {1}{4\pi ^{2}}}\int _{0}^{\infty }\int _{-\pi }^{\pi }D(\Omega ,\theta )e^{j\Omega u\cos(\theta )}e^{j\Omega vsin\theta }{\begin{vmatrix}\Omega \end{vmatrix}}\,\mathrm {d} \Omega \mathrm {d} \theta } = 1 4 π 2 ∫ − π π ∫ 0 ∞ P θ ( Ω ) e j Ω ( u cos θ + v sin θ ) | Ω | d Ω d θ {\displaystyle ={\frac {1}{4\pi ^{2}}}\int _{-\pi }^{\pi }\int _{0}^{\infty }P_{\theta }(\Omega )e^{j}\Omega (u\cos \theta +v\sin \theta ){\begin{vmatrix}\Omega \end{vmatrix}}\,\mathrm {d} \Omega \mathrm {d} \theta } = 1 4 π 2 ∫ 0 π ( ∫ − ∞ ∞ P θ ( Ω ) | Ω | {\displaystyle ={\frac {1}{4\pi ^{2}}}\int _{0}^{\pi }(\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }P_{\theta }(\Omega ){\begin{vmatrix}\Omega \end{vmatrix}}} e j Ω u ^ d Ω ) d θ {\displaystyle e^{j\Omega {\hat {u}}}\mathrm {d} \Omega )\mathrm {d} \theta } By taking the inverse Fourier Transform and assuming g ( u ^ ) = F − 1 ( | Ω | 2 ) {\displaystyle g({\hat {u}})={\mathcal {F}}^{-1}({{\begin{vmatrix}\Omega \end{vmatrix}}^{2}})} , we get d ( u , v ) = ∑ i △ θ i [ p θ ( u ^ ) ∗ g θ i ( u ^ ) ] {\displaystyle d(u,v)=\sum _{i}\vartriangle \theta _{i}[p_{\theta }({\hat {u}})g_{\theta i}({\hat {u}})]} == Approaches == In practice, there are a wide variety of methods that are utilized, most of which are reconstruct 3-D information (volume) from 2-D signals (image). Typically used methods are CT, MRI, PET and SPECT. And the filtered back projection based on the principles introduced above are commonly applied. === Computed Tomography (CT) === In CT, a volume is formed by stacking the axial slices. The software cuts the volume in a different plane (usually orthogonal). Commonly, slice data is generated using an X-ray source that rotates around the object. X-ray sensors are positioned on the opposite side of the circle from the X-ray source. === Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) === In MRI, energy from an oscillating magnetic field is temporarily applied to the patient at the appropriate resonance frequency. The protons (hydrogen atoms) emit a radio frequency signal which is measured by a receiving coil. The radio signal can be made to encode position information by varying the main magnetic field using gradient coils. === Positron emission tomography (PET) === The system detects pairs of gamma rays emitted indirectly by a positron-emitting radionuclide (tracer), which is introduced into the body on a biologically active molecule. Three-dimensional images of tracer concentration within the body are then constructed by computer analysis. In modern PET-CT scanners, three dimensional imaging is often accomplished with the aid of a CT X-ray scan performed on the patient during the same session, in the same machine. === Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) === SPECT imaging is performed by using a gamma camera to acquire multiple 2-D images (projections) from multiple angles. Multiple projections are used to yield a 3-D data set. This data set may then be manipulated to show thin slices along any chosen axis of the body. SPECT is similar to PET in its use of radioactive tracer material and detection of gamma rays, while the tracers used in SPECT emit gamma radiation that is measured more directly.
Vapnik–Chervonenkis theory
Vapnik–Chervonenkis theory (also known as VC theory) was developed during 1960–1990 by Vladimir Vapnik and Alexey Chervonenkis. The theory is a form of computational learning theory, which attempts to explain the learning process from a statistical point of view. == Introduction == VC theory covers at least four parts (as explained in The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory): Theory of consistency of learning processes What are (necessary and sufficient) conditions for consistency of a learning process based on the empirical risk minimization principle? Nonasymptotic theory of the rate of convergence of learning processes How fast is the rate of convergence of the learning process? Theory of controlling the generalization ability of learning processes How can one control the rate of convergence (the generalization ability) of the learning process? Theory of constructing learning machines How can one construct algorithms that can control the generalization ability? VC Theory is a major subbranch of statistical learning theory. One of its main applications in statistical learning theory is to provide generalization conditions for learning algorithms. From this point of view, VC theory is related to stability, which is an alternative approach for characterizing generalization. In addition, VC theory and VC dimension are instrumental in the theory of empirical processes, in the case of processes indexed by VC classes. Arguably these are the most important applications of the VC theory, and are employed in proving generalization. Several techniques will be introduced that are widely used in the empirical process and VC theory. The discussion is mainly based on the book Weak Convergence and Empirical Processes: With Applications to Statistics. == Overview of VC theory in empirical processes == === Background on empirical processes === Let ( X , A ) {\displaystyle ({\mathcal {X}},{\mathcal {A}})} be a measurable space. For any measure Q {\displaystyle Q} on ( X , A ) {\displaystyle ({\mathcal {X}},{\mathcal {A}})} , and any measurable functions f : X → R {\displaystyle f:{\mathcal {X}}\to \mathbf {R} } , define Q f = ∫ f d Q {\displaystyle Qf=\int fdQ} Measurability issues will be ignored here, for more technical detail see. Let F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} be a class of measurable functions f : X → R {\displaystyle f:{\mathcal {X}}\to \mathbf {R} } and define: ‖ Q ‖ F = sup { | Q f | : f ∈ F } . {\displaystyle \|Q\|_{\mathcal {F}}=\sup\{\vert Qf\vert \ :\ f\in {\mathcal {F}}\}.} Let X 1 , … , X n {\displaystyle X_{1},\ldots ,X_{n}} be independent, identically distributed random elements of ( X , A ) {\displaystyle ({\mathcal {X}},{\mathcal {A}})} . Then define the empirical measure P n = n − 1 ∑ i = 1 n δ X i , {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} _{n}=n^{-1}\sum _{i=1}^{n}\delta _{X_{i}},} where δ here stands for the Dirac measure. The empirical measure induces a map F → R {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}\to \mathbf {R} } given by: f ↦ P n f = 1 n ( f ( X 1 ) + . . . + f ( X n ) ) {\displaystyle f\mapsto \mathbb {P} _{n}f={\frac {1}{n}}(f(X_{1})+...+f(X_{n}))} Now suppose P is the underlying true distribution of the data, which is unknown. Empirical Processes theory aims at identifying classes F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} for which statements such as the following hold: uniform law of large numbers: ‖ P n − P ‖ F → n 0 , {\displaystyle \|\mathbb {P} _{n}-P\|_{\mathcal {F}}{\underset {n}{\to }}0,} That is, as n → ∞ {\displaystyle n\to \infty } , | 1 n ( f ( X 1 ) + . . . + f ( X n ) ) − ∫ f d P | → 0 {\displaystyle \left|{\frac {1}{n}}(f(X_{1})+...+f(X_{n}))-\int fdP\right|\to 0} uniformly for all f ∈ F {\displaystyle f\in {\mathcal {F}}} . uniform central limit theorem: G n = n ( P n − P ) ⇝ G , in ℓ ∞ ( F ) {\displaystyle \mathbb {G} _{n}={\sqrt {n}}(\mathbb {P} _{n}-P)\rightsquigarrow \mathbb {G} ,\quad {\text{in }}\ell ^{\infty }({\mathcal {F}})} In the former case F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} is called Glivenko–Cantelli class, and in the latter case (under the assumption ∀ x , sup f ∈ F | f ( x ) − P f | < ∞ {\displaystyle \forall x,\sup \nolimits _{f\in {\mathcal {F}}}\vert f(x)-Pf\vert <\infty } ) the class F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} is called Donsker or P-Donsker. A Donsker class is Glivenko–Cantelli in probability by an application of Slutsky's theorem. These statements are true for a single f {\displaystyle f} , by standard LLN, CLT arguments under regularity conditions, and the difficulty in the Empirical Processes comes in because joint statements are being made for all f ∈ F {\displaystyle f\in {\mathcal {F}}} . Intuitively then, the set F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} cannot be too large, and as it turns out that the geometry of F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} plays a very important role. One way of measuring how big the function set F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} is to use the so-called covering numbers. The covering number N ( ε , F , ‖ ⋅ ‖ ) {\displaystyle N(\varepsilon ,{\mathcal {F}},\|\cdot \|)} is the minimal number of balls { g : ‖ g − f ‖ < ε } {\displaystyle \{g:\|g-f\|<\varepsilon \}} needed to cover the set F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} (here it is obviously assumed that there is an underlying norm on F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} ). The entropy is the logarithm of the covering number. Two sufficient conditions are provided below, under which it can be proved that the set F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} is Glivenko–Cantelli or Donsker. A class F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} is P-Glivenko–Cantelli if it is P-measurable with envelope F such that P ∗ F < ∞ {\displaystyle P^{\ast }F<\infty } and satisfies: ∀ ε > 0 sup Q N ( ε ‖ F ‖ Q , F , L 1 ( Q ) ) < ∞ . {\displaystyle \forall \varepsilon >0\quad \sup \nolimits _{Q}N(\varepsilon \|F\|_{Q},{\mathcal {F}},L_{1}(Q))<\infty .} The next condition is a version of Dudley's theorem. If F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} is a class of functions such that ∫ 0 ∞ sup Q log N ( ε ‖ F ‖ Q , 2 , F , L 2 ( Q ) ) d ε < ∞ {\displaystyle \int _{0}^{\infty }\sup \nolimits _{Q}{\sqrt {\log N\left(\varepsilon \|F\|_{Q,2},{\mathcal {F}},L_{2}(Q)\right)}}d\varepsilon <\infty } then F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} is P-Donsker for every probability measure P such that P ∗ F 2 < ∞ {\displaystyle P^{\ast }F^{2}<\infty } . In the last integral, the notation means ‖ f ‖ Q , 2 = ( ∫ | f | 2 d Q ) 1 2 {\displaystyle \|f\|_{Q,2}=\left(\int |f|^{2}dQ\right)^{\frac {1}{2}}} . === Symmetrization === The majority of the arguments about how to bound the empirical process rely on symmetrization, maximal and concentration inequalities, and chaining. Symmetrization is usually the first step of the proofs, and since it is used in many machine learning proofs on bounding empirical loss functions (including the proof of the VC inequality which is discussed in the next section). It is presented here: Consider the empirical process: f ↦ ( P n − P ) f = 1 n ∑ i = 1 n ( f ( X i ) − P f ) {\displaystyle f\mapsto (\mathbb {P} _{n}-P)f={\dfrac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}(f(X_{i})-Pf)} Turns out that there is a connection between the empirical and the following symmetrized process: f ↦ P n 0 f = 1 n ∑ i = 1 n ε i f ( X i ) {\displaystyle f\mapsto \mathbb {P} _{n}^{0}f={\dfrac {1}{n}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}\varepsilon _{i}f(X_{i})} The symmetrized process is a Rademacher process, conditionally on the data X i {\displaystyle X_{i}} . Therefore, it is a sub-Gaussian process by Hoeffding's inequality. Lemma (Symmetrization). For every nondecreasing, convex Φ: R → R and class of measurable functions F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} , E Φ ( ‖ P n − P ‖ F ) ≤ E Φ ( 2 ‖ P n 0 ‖ F ) {\displaystyle \mathbb {E} \Phi (\|\mathbb {P} _{n}-P\|_{\mathcal {F}})\leq \mathbb {E} \Phi \left(2\left\|\mathbb {P} _{n}^{0}\right\|_{\mathcal {F}}\right)} The proof of the Symmetrization lemma relies on introducing independent copies of the original variables X i {\displaystyle X_{i}} (sometimes referred to as a ghost sample) and replacing the inner expectation of the LHS by these copies. After an application of Jensen's inequality different signs could be introduced (hence the name symmetrization) without changing the expectation. The proof can be found below because of its instructive nature. The same proof method can be used to prove the Glivenko–Cantelli theorem. A typical way of proving empirical CLTs, first uses symmetrization to pass the empirical process to P n 0 {\displaystyle \mathbb {P} _{n}^{0}} and then argue conditionally on the data, using the fact that Rademacher processes are simple processes with nice properties. === VC Connection === It turns out that there is a fascinating connection between certain combinatorial properties of the set F {\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}} and the entropy numbers. Uniform covering numbers can be controlled by the notion of Vapnik–Chervonenkis classes of sets – or shortly VC sets. Consider a collection C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {C}}} of subsets of the sample space X {\displaystyle
Defining length
In the field of genetic algorithms, a schema (plural: schemata) is a template that represents a subset of potential solutions. These templates use fixed symbols (e.g., `0` or `1`) for specific positions and a wildcard or "don't care" symbol (often `#` or ``) for others. The defining length of a schema, denoted as L(H), measures the distance between the outermost fixed positions in the template. According to the Schema theorem, a schema with a shorter defining length is less likely to be disrupted by the genetic operator of crossover. As a result, short schemata are considered more robust and are more likely to be propagated to the next generation. In genetic programming, where solutions are often represented as trees, the defining length is the number of links in the minimum tree fragment that includes all the non-wildcard symbols within a schema H. == Example == The defining length is calculated by subtracting the position of the first fixed symbol from the position of the last one. Using 1-based indexing for a string of length 5: The schema `1##0#` has its first fixed symbol (`1`) at position 1 and its last fixed symbol (`0`) at position 4. Its defining length is 4 − 1 = 3. The schema `00##0` has its first fixed symbol at position 1 and its last at position 5. Its defining length is 5 − 1 = 4. The schema `##0##` has only one fixed symbol at position 3. The first and last fixed positions are the same, so its defining length is 3 − 3 = 0.
Principal component analysis
Principal component analysis (PCA) is a linear dimensionality reduction technique with applications in exploratory data analysis, visualization and data preprocessing. The data are linearly transformed onto a new coordinate system such that the directions (principal components) capturing the largest variation in the data can be easily identified. The principal components of a collection of points in a real coordinate space are a sequence of p {\displaystyle p} unit vectors, where the i {\displaystyle i} -th vector is the direction of a line that best fits the data while being orthogonal to the first i − 1 {\displaystyle i-1} vectors. Here, a best-fitting line is defined as one that minimizes the average squared perpendicular distance from the points to the line. These directions (i.e., principal components) constitute an orthonormal basis in which different individual dimensions of the data are linearly uncorrelated. Many studies use the first two principal components in order to plot the data in two dimensions and to visually identify clusters of closely related data points. Principal component analysis has applications in many fields such as population genetics, microbiome studies, and atmospheric science. == Overview == When performing PCA, the first principal component of a set of p {\displaystyle p} variables is the derived variable formed as a linear combination of the original variables that explains the most variance. The second principal component explains the most variance in what is left once the effect of the first component is removed, and we may proceed through p {\displaystyle p} iterations until all the variance is explained. PCA is most commonly used when many of the variables are highly correlated with each other and it is desirable to reduce their number to an independent set. The first principal component can equivalently be defined as a direction that maximizes the variance of the projected data. The i {\displaystyle i} -th principal component can be taken as a direction orthogonal to the first i − 1 {\displaystyle i-1} principal components that maximizes the variance of the projected data. For either objective, it can be shown that the principal components are eigenvectors of the data's covariance matrix. Thus, the principal components are often computed by eigendecomposition of the data covariance matrix or singular value decomposition of the data matrix. PCA is the simplest of the true eigenvector-based multivariate analyses and is closely related to factor analysis. Factor analysis typically incorporates more domain-specific assumptions about the underlying structure and solves eigenvectors of a slightly different matrix. PCA is also related to canonical correlation analysis (CCA). CCA defines coordinate systems that optimally describe the cross-covariance between two datasets while PCA defines a new orthogonal coordinate system that optimally describes variance in a single dataset. Robust and L1-norm-based variants of standard PCA have also been proposed. == History == PCA was invented in 1901 by Karl Pearson, as an analogue of the principal axis theorem in mechanics; it was later independently developed and named by Harold Hotelling in the 1930s. Depending on the field of application, it is also named the discrete Karhunen–Loève transform (KLT) in signal processing, the Hotelling transform in multivariate quality control, proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) in mechanical engineering, singular value decomposition (SVD) of X (invented in the last quarter of the 19th century), eigenvalue decomposition (EVD) of XTX in linear algebra, factor analysis (for a discussion of the differences between PCA and factor analysis see Ch. 7 of Jolliffe's Principal Component Analysis), Eckart–Young theorem (Harman, 1960), or empirical orthogonal functions (EOF) in meteorological science (Lorenz, 1956), empirical eigenfunction decomposition (Sirovich, 1987), quasiharmonic modes (Brooks et al., 1988), spectral decomposition in noise and vibration, and empirical modal analysis in structural dynamics. == Intuition == PCA can be thought of as fitting a p-dimensional ellipsoid to the data, where each axis of the ellipsoid represents a principal component. If some axis of the ellipsoid is small, then the variance along that axis is also small. To find the axes of the ellipsoid, we must first center the values of each variable in the dataset on 0 by subtracting the mean of the variable's observed values from each of those values. These transformed values are used instead of the original observed values for each of the variables. Then, we compute the covariance matrix of the data and calculate the eigenvalues and corresponding eigenvectors of this covariance matrix. Then we must normalize each of the orthogonal eigenvectors to turn them into unit vectors. Once this is done, each of the mutually-orthogonal unit eigenvectors can be interpreted as an axis of the ellipsoid fitted to the data. This choice of basis will transform the covariance matrix into a diagonalized form, in which the diagonal elements represent the variance of each axis. The proportion of the variance that each eigenvector represents can be calculated by dividing the eigenvalue corresponding to that eigenvector by the sum of all eigenvalues. Biplots and scree plots (degree of explained variance) are used to interpret findings of the PCA. == Details == PCA is defined as an orthogonal linear transformation on a real inner product space that transforms the data to a new coordinate system such that the greatest variance by some scalar projection of the data comes to lie on the first coordinate (called the first principal component), the second greatest variance on the second coordinate, and so on. Consider an n × p {\displaystyle n\times p} data matrix, X, with column-wise zero empirical mean (the sample mean of each column has been shifted to zero), where each of the n rows represents a different repetition of the experiment, and each of the p columns gives a particular kind of feature (say, the results from a particular sensor). Mathematically, the transformation is defined by a set of size l {\displaystyle l} (where l {\displaystyle l} is usually selected to be strictly less than p {\displaystyle p} to reduce dimensionality) of p {\displaystyle p} -dimensional vectors of weights or coefficients w ( k ) = ( w 1 , … , w p ) ( k ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} _{(k)}=(w_{1},\dots ,w_{p})_{(k)}} that map each row vector x ( i ) = ( x 1 , … , x p ) ( i ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} _{(i)}=(x_{1},\dots ,x_{p})_{(i)}} of X to a new vector of principal component scores t ( i ) = ( t 1 , … , t l ) ( i ) {\displaystyle \mathbf {t} _{(i)}=(t_{1},\dots ,t_{l})_{(i)}} , given by t k ( i ) = x ( i ) ⋅ w ( k ) f o r i = 1 , … , n k = 1 , … , l {\displaystyle {t_{k}}_{(i)}=\mathbf {x} _{(i)}\cdot \mathbf {w} _{(k)}\qquad \mathrm {for} \qquad i=1,\dots ,n\qquad k=1,\dots ,l} in such a way that the individual variables t 1 , … , t l {\displaystyle t_{1},\dots ,t_{l}} of t considered over the data set successively inherit the maximum possible variance from X, with each coefficient vector w constrained to be a unit vector. The above may equivalently be written in matrix form as T = X W {\displaystyle \mathbf {T} =\mathbf {X} \mathbf {W} } where T i k = t k ( i ) {\displaystyle {\mathbf {T} }_{ik}={t_{k}}_{(i)}} , X i j = x j ( i ) {\displaystyle {\mathbf {X} }_{ij}={x_{j}}_{(i)}} , and W j k = w j ( k ) {\displaystyle {\mathbf {W} }_{jk}={w_{j}}_{(k)}} . === First component === In order to maximize variance, the first weight vector w(1) thus has to satisfy w ( 1 ) = arg max ‖ w ‖ = 1 { ∑ i ( t 1 ) ( i ) 2 } = arg max ‖ w ‖ = 1 { ∑ i ( x ( i ) ⋅ w ) 2 } {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} _{(1)}=\arg \max _{\Vert \mathbf {w} \Vert =1}\,\left\{\sum _{i}(t_{1})_{(i)}^{2}\right\}=\arg \max _{\Vert \mathbf {w} \Vert =1}\,\left\{\sum _{i}\left(\mathbf {x} _{(i)}\cdot \mathbf {w} \right)^{2}\right\}} Equivalently, writing this in matrix form gives w ( 1 ) = arg max ‖ w ‖ = 1 { ‖ X w ‖ 2 } = arg max ‖ w ‖ = 1 { w T X T X w } {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} _{(1)}=\arg \max _{\left\|\mathbf {w} \right\|=1}\left\{\left\|\mathbf {Xw} \right\|^{2}\right\}=\arg \max _{\left\|\mathbf {w} \right\|=1}\left\{\mathbf {w} ^{\mathsf {T}}\mathbf {X} ^{\mathsf {T}}\mathbf {Xw} \right\}} Since w(1) has been defined to be a unit vector, it equivalently also satisfies w ( 1 ) = arg max { w T X T X w w T w } {\displaystyle \mathbf {w} _{(1)}=\arg \max \left\{{\frac {\mathbf {w} ^{\mathsf {T}}\mathbf {X} ^{\mathsf {T}}\mathbf {Xw} }{\mathbf {w} ^{\mathsf {T}}\mathbf {w} }}\right\}} The quantity to be maximised can be recognised as a Rayleigh quotient. A standard result for a positive semidefinite matrix such as XTX is that the quotient's maximum possible value is the largest eigenvalue of the matrix, which occurs when w is the corresponding eigenvector. With w(1) found, the first principal component of a data vector
Automatic meter reading
Automatic meter reading (AMR) is the technology of automatically collecting consumption, diagnostic, and status data from water meter or energy metering devices (gas, electric) and transferring that data to a central database for billing, troubleshooting, and analyzing. This technology mainly saves utility providers the expense of periodic trips to each physical location to read a meter. Another advantage is that billing can be based on near real-time consumption rather than on estimates based on past or predicted consumption. This timely information coupled with analysis can help both utility providers and customers better control the use and production of electric energy, gas usage, or water consumption. AMR technologies include handheld, mobile and network technologies based on telephony platforms (wired and wireless), radio frequency (RF), or powerline transmission. == Technologies == === Touch technology === With touch-based AMR, a meter reader carries a handheld computer or data collection device with a wand or probe. The device automatically collects the readings from a meter by touching or placing the read probe close to a reading coil enclosed in the touchpad. When a button is pressed, the probe sends an interrogate signal to the touch module to collect the meter reading. The software in the device matches the serial number to one in the route database, and saves the meter reading for later download to a billing or data collection computer. Since the meter reader still has to go to the site of the meter, this is sometimes referred to as "on-site" AMR. Another form of contact reader uses a standardized infrared port to transmit data. Protocols are standardized between manufacturers by such documents as ANSI C12.18 or IEC 61107. === AMR hosting === AMR hosting is a back-office solution which allows a user to track their electricity, water, or gas consumption over the Internet. All data is collected in near real-time, and is stored in a database by data acquisition software. The user can view the data via a web application, and can analyze the data using various online analysis tools such as charting load profiles, analyzing tariff components, and verify their utility bill. === Radio frequency network === Radio frequency based AMR can take many forms. The more common ones are handheld, mobile, satellite and fixed network solutions. There are both two-way RF systems and one-way RF systems in use that use both licensed and unlicensed RF bands. In a two-way or "wake up" system, a radio signal is normally sent to an AMR meter's unique serial number, instructing its transceiver to power-up and transmit its data. The meter transceiver and the reading transceiver both send and receive radio signals. In a one-way "bubble-up" or continuous broadcast type system, the meter transmits continuously and data is sent every few seconds. This means the reading device can be a receiver only, and the meter a transmitter only. Data travels only from the meter transmitter to the reading receiver. There are also hybrid systems that combine one-way and two-way techniques, using one-way communication for reading and two-way communication for programming functions. RF-based meter reading usually eliminates the need for the meter reader to enter the property or home, or to locate and open an underground meter pit. The utility saves money by increased speed of reading, has less liability from entering private property, and has fewer missed readings from being unable to access the meter. The technology based on RF is not readily accepted everywhere. In several Asian countries, the technology faces a barrier of regulations in place pertaining to use of the radio frequency of any radiated power. For example, in India the radio frequency which is generally in ISM band is not free to use even for low power radio of 10 mW. The majority of manufacturers of electricity meters have radio frequency devices in the frequency band of 433/868 MHz for large scale deployment in European countries. The frequency band of 2.4 GHz can be now used in India for outdoor as well as indoor applications, but few manufacturers have shown products within this frequency band. Initiatives in radio frequency AMR in such countries are being taken up with regulators wherever the cost of licensing outweighs the benefits of AMR. ==== Handheld ==== In handheld AMR, a meter reader carries a handheld computer with a built-in or attached receiver/transceiver (radio frequency or touch) to collect meter readings from an AMR capable meter. This is sometimes referred to as "walk-by" meter reading since the meter reader walks by the locations where meters are installed as they go through their meter reading route. Handheld computers may also be used to manually enter readings without the use of AMR technology as an alternate but this will not support exhaustive data which can be accurately read using the meter reading electronically. ==== Mobile ==== Mobile or "drive-by" meter reading is where a reading device is installed in a vehicle. The meter reader drives the vehicle while the reading device automatically collects the meter readings. Often, for mobile meter reading, the reading equipment includes navigational and mapping features provided by GPS and mapping software. With mobile meter reading, the reader does not normally have to read the meters in any particular route order, but just drives the service area until all meters are read. Components often consist of a laptop or proprietary computer, software, RF receiver/transceiver, and external vehicle antennas. ==== Satellite ==== Transmitters for data collection satellites can be installed in the field next to existing meters. The satellite AMR devices communicate with the meter for readings, and then sends those readings over a fixed or mobile satellite network. This network requires a clear view to the sky for the satellite transmitter/receiver, but eliminates the need to install fixed towers or send out field technicians, thereby being particularly suited for areas with low geographic meter density. ==== RF technologies commonly used for AMR ==== Narrow Band (single fixed radio frequency) Spread spectrum Direct-sequence spread spectrum (DSSS) Frequency-hopping spread spectrum (FHSS) There are also meters using AMR with RF technologies such as cellular phone data systems, Zigbee, Bluetooth, Wavenis and others. Some systems operate with U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) licensed frequencies and others under FCC Part 15, which allows use of unlicensed radio frequencies. ==== Wi-Fi ==== WiSmart is a versatile platform which can be used by a variety of electrical home appliances in order to provide wireless TCP/IP communication using the 802.11 b/g protocol. Devices such as the Smart Thermostat permit a utility to lower a home's power consumption to help manage power demand. The city of Corpus Christi became one of the first cities in the United States to implement citywide Wi-Fi, which had been free until May 31, 2007, mainly to facilitate AMR after a meter reader was attacked by a dog. Today many meters are designed to transmit using Wi-Fi, even if a Wi-Fi network is not available, and they are read using a drive-by local Wi-Fi hand held receiver. The meters installed in Corpus Christi are not directly Wi-Fi enabled, but rather transmit narrow-band burst telemetry on the 460 MHz band. This narrow-band signal has much greater range than Wi-Fi, so the number of receivers required for the project are far fewer. Special receiver stations then decode the narrow-band signals and resend the data via Wi-Fi. Most of the automated utility meters installed in the Corpus Christi area are battery powered. Wi-Fi technology is unsuitable for long-term battery-powered operation. === Power line communication === PLC is a method where electronic data is transmitted over power lines back to the substation, then relayed to a central computer in the utility's main office. This would be considered a type of fixed network system—the network being the distribution network which the utility has built and maintains to deliver electric power. Such systems are primarily used for electric meter reading. Some providers have interfaced gas and water meters to feed into a PLC type system. == Brief history == In 1972, Theodore George "Ted" Paraskevakos, while working with Boeing in Huntsville, Alabama, developed a sensor monitoring system which used digital transmission for security, fire and medical alarm systems as well as meter reading capabilities for all utilities. This technology was a spin-off of the automatic telephone line identification system, now known as caller ID. In 1974, Paraskevakos was awarded a U.S. patent for this technology. In 1977, he launched Metretek, Inc., which developed and produced the first fully automated, commercially available remote meter reading and load management system. Since this system was developed pre-Internet, Metret
Frequent pattern discovery
Frequent pattern discovery (or FP discovery, FP mining, or Frequent itemset mining) is part of knowledge discovery in databases, Massive Online Analysis, and data mining; it describes the task of finding the most frequent and relevant patterns in large datasets. The concept was first introduced for mining transaction databases. Frequent patterns are defined as subsets (itemsets, subsequences, or substructures) that appear in a data set with frequency no less than a user-specified or auto-determined threshold. == Techniques == Techniques for FP mining include: market basket analysis cross-marketing catalog design clustering classification recommendation systems For the most part, FP discovery can be done using association rule learning with particular algorithms Eclat, FP-growth and the Apriori algorithm. Other strategies include: Frequent subtree mining Structure mining Sequential pattern mining and respective specific techniques. Implementations exist for various machine learning systems or modules like MLlib for Apache Spark.