* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Paul Rauwolf - WordPress.com
Survey
Document related concepts
Convolutional neural network wikipedia , lookup
Quantum machine learning wikipedia , lookup
Existential risk from artificial general intelligence wikipedia , lookup
Intelligence explosion wikipedia , lookup
Ethics of artificial intelligence wikipedia , lookup
Philosophy of artificial intelligence wikipedia , lookup
Catastrophic interference wikipedia , lookup
Genetic algorithm wikipedia , lookup
Reinforcement learning wikipedia , lookup
History of artificial intelligence wikipedia , lookup
Pattern recognition wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Paul Rauwolf E-mail: [email protected] Summary: Graduated first in class with an MSc in Artificial Intelligence, focusing on nontask specific learning within the field of machine learning. Pursuing doctorate under the David Parkin scholarship (three years, full tuition) 3 years experience as a project lead for software development. 10 years experience as a java developer (Sun certified java programmer). Member of the American branch of Mensa. Technical Skills: Machine Learning Techniques Probability Models: Languages (years) Web Languages Databases Version Control Backpropagated Neural Networks, K-means clustering, PCA, Genetic Algorithms, Simulated Annealing, Reinforcement Learning Bayesian Networks, Markov Models Java(10 years), Matlab(2), Octave(1), VB.net(4), C#(1), VB 6.0, C++, VBA, SAS, ML, Prolog J2EE, PHP, Javascript, CSS, HTML Mysql, MS Access Perforce Education: 2012-2015: PhD., Computer Science, University of Bath, In Progress Research Area: The evolution of Self-Deception. MSc., Informatics, University of Sussex, 2010. Major: Artificial Intelligence focusing on Evolutionary and Adaptive Systems. Graduated first in class with distinction. Concentrations: o Machine learning – Neural Networks, Reinforcement Learning, K-Means, PCA, Simulated Annealing, Genetic Algorithms, Evolutionary Algorithms. o Published a paper implementing a neural network to disprove a claim in a publication within developmental psychology. o For my dissertation I employed simulated annealing and neural networks to compare non-task specific learning mechanisms (Abstract below). o Utilized genetic algorithms to falsify claims by Robert Axelrod, regarding the evolutionary formation of social norms. o Studied reinforcement learning for a final project for an advanced mathematics class. B.S., Major: Computer Science, Minor: Philosophy, University of Iowa, 2002. Additional studies: Online University of Stanford classes: o Machine learning (Linear Regression, Backpropagated Neural Networks, K-Means Clustering, PCA, Support Vector Machines, Unsupervised Recommender machines) o Introduction to Artificial Intelligence o Game Theory Publications: Rauwolf, Paul and Berthouze, Luc (2010). “Transfer or no Transfer: The Key Role of Learning Specificity” In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Epigenetic Robotics, pp. 97-104. Ghostwriter/editor in: Witchel, H. (2010). You Are What You Hear : How Music and Territory Make Us Who We Are. New York: Algora. Work Experience: NCS Pearson, Iowa City, IA (02/15/00 – 09/20/09; 11/20/10 - Present) Automation Lead: Software Developer (11/20/10 – Present) o Lead designer and developer for creating applications to augment a onehundred person testing team. o Required to solve complex testing needs generically, despite a lack of standardization between the hundreds of projects in need of aid. Team Lead: Software Developer (06/01/07 – 09/20/09) o Managed a group of seven developers in designing and programming a $250,000 application. o Collaborated with customers and management as the point of contact for all deliverables. Presented proposals for applications, including timeframes, budgets, and workflows. Software Developer I-III (02/15/00 – 06/01/07) o Designed and developed an application which saved the company 20,000 man-hours every year. o Developed a code-base for semi-automated test case generation. Independent Researcher and Writer (11/01/09 – 05/20/10) Dr. Harry Witchel (see: Publications) o Wrote rough drafts of chapters. o Researched. o Debated logical flow and inclusion of topics. Awards and Honors: David Parkin Scholarship, 2012 (full tuition for 3 years to pursue PhD) Chancellor’s International Scholarship, 2009 Sun Certified Java Programmer, 2008 Qualified Member of the American Branch of Mensa (http://www.us.mensa.org) Volunteer Experience: Developed the University of Iowa Chess Club website, 1999 Taught elementary school chess, 2008 MSc Dissertation Abstract: Within the field of developmental robotics, recent advances in the study of intrinsic motivation algorithms have lent credence to the potential of non-task specific learning (Oudeyer, Kaplan, & Hafner, 2007) (Singh, Barto, & Chentanez, 2005) (Schmidhuber, 2002). In a relatively brief period, the literature has explored several unique intrinsic motivation mechanisms (Oudeyer & Kaplan, 2007). However, to the author’s knowledge, no work has been conducted which systematically compares such algorithms via an indepth study. This work initiated such research by contrasting the advantages and disadvantages of two unique intrinsically motivated heuristics: (1) which sought novel experiences and (2) which attempted to accurately predict the consequences of experiences. However, it was hypothesized that the benefits of intrinsic motivation algorithms could not be analyzed in isolation. A case was set forward to validate the postulation that the values of intrinsic motivation heuristics are contingent on at least three factors: (1) the environment / the agent’s sensory coupling to the environment, (2) the agent’s learning mechanism, and (3) an experimenter’s criteria for success. It was shown that altering any these contingencies could affect the comparative advantages of employing either intrinsic motivation heuristic. Hence, this work advocates that future advances in intrinsic motivation would be aided by a thorough examination into the factors on which intrinsically motivated agents depend. This would permit experimenters to adopt an intrinsic motivation mechanism with the knowledge of its dependencies, strengths, and weaknesses, thus encouraging more focused research into the potential of intrinsic motivation heuristics. Bibliography Oudeyer, P.-Y., & Kaplan, F. (2007). What is Intrinsic Motivation? A Typology of Computational Approaches. Front. Neurorobot , 1-14. Oudeyer, P.-Y., Kaplan, F., & Hafner, V. (2007). Intrinsic Motivation Systems for Autonomous Mental Development. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation , 122. Schmidhuber, J. (2002). Exploring the Predictable. In S. Ghosh, & S. Tsutsui, Advances in Evolutionary Computing (pp. 579-612). Singh, S., Barto, A. G., & Chentanez, N. (2005). Intrinsically Motivated Reinforcement Learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing 18., (pp. 1-8).