20 August 2020

Tackling Open Challenges in Offline Reinforcement Learning


Over the past several years, there has been a surge of interest in reinforcement learning (RL) driven by its high-profile successes in game playing and robotic control. However, unlike supervised learning methods, which learn from massive datasets that are collected once and then reused, RL algorithms use a trial-and-error feedback loop that requires active interaction during learning, collecting data every time a new policy is learned. This approach is prohibitive in many real-world settings, such as healthcare, autonomous driving, and dialogue systems, where trial-and-error data collection can be costly, time consuming, or even irresponsible. Even for problems where some active data collection can be used, the requirement for interactive collection limits dataset size and diversity.

Offline RL (also called batch RL or fully off-policy RL) relies solely on a previously collected dataset without further interaction. It provides a way to utilize previously collected datasets — from previous RL experiments, from human demonstrations, and from hand-engineered exploration strategies — in order to automatically learn decision-making strategies. In principle, while off-policy RL algorithms can be used in the offline setting (fully off-policy), they are generally only successful when used with active environment interaction — without receiving this direct feedback, they often exhibit undesirable performance in practice. Consequently, while offline RL has enormous potential, that potential cannot be reached without resolving significant algorithmic challenges.

In “Offline Reinforcement Learning: Tutorial, Review, and Perspectives on Open Problems”, we provide a comprehensive tutorial on approaches for tackling the challenges of offline RL and discuss the many issues that remain. To address these issues, we have designed and released an open-source benchmarking framework, Datasets for Deep Data-Driven Reinforcement Learning (D4RL), as well as a new, simple, and highly effective offline RL algorithm, called conservative Q-learning (CQL).

Benchmarks for Offline RL
In order to understand the capabilities of current approaches and to guide future progress, it is first necessary to have effective benchmarks. A common choice in prior work was to simply use data generated by a successful online RL run. However, while simple, this data collection approach is artificial because it involves training an online RL agent which is prohibitive in many real-world settings as we discussed previously. One wishes to learn a policy that is better than the current best from diverse data sources that provides good coverage of the task. For example, one might have data collected from a hand-designed controller of a robot arm, and use offline RL to train an improved controller. To enable progress in this field under realistic settings, one needs a benchmark suite that accurately reflects these settings, while being simple and accessible enough to enable rapid experimentation.

D4RL provides standardized environments, datasets and evaluation protocols, as well as reference scores for recent algorithms to help accomplish this. This is a “batteries-included” resource, making it ideal for anyone to jump in and get started with minimal fuss.

Environments in D4RL

The key design goal for D4RL was to develop tasks that reflect both real-world dataset challenges as well as real-world applications. Previous datasets used data collected either from random agents or agents trained with RL. Instead, by thinking through potential applications in autonomous driving, robotics, and other domains, we considered how real-world applications of offline RL might require handling of data generated from human demonstrations or hard-coded controllers, data collected from heterogeneous sources, and data collected by agents with a variety of different goals.

Aside from the widely used MuJoCo locomotion tasks, D4RL includes datasets for more complex tasks. The Adroit domain, which requires manipulating a realistic robotic hand to use a hammer, for example, illustrates the challenges of working with limited human demonstrations, without which these tasks are extremely challenging. Previous work found that existing datasets could not distinguish between competing methods, whereas the Adroit domain reveals clear deficiencies between them.

Another common scenario for real-world tasks is one in which the dataset used for training is collected from agents performing a wide range of other activities that are related to, but not specifically targeted towards, the task of interest. For example, data from human drivers may illustrate how to drive a car well, but do not necessarily show how to reach a specific desired destination. In this case, one might like offline RL methods to “stitch” together parts of routes in the driving dataset to accomplish a task that was not actually seen in the data (i.e., navigation). As an illustrative example, given paths labeled “A” and “B” in the picture below, offline RL should be able to “remix” them to produce path C.

Having only observed paths A and B, they can be combined to form a shortest path (C).

We constructed a series of increasingly difficult tasks to exercise this “stitching” ability. The maze environments, shown below, require two robots (a simple ball or an “Ant” robot) to navigate to locations in a series of mazes.

Maze navigation environments in D4RL, which require “stitching” parts of paths to accomplish new navigational goals that were not seen in the dataset.

A more complex “stitching” scenario is provided by the Franka kitchen domain (based on the Adept environment), where demonstrations from humans using a VR interface comprise a multi-task dataset, and offline RL methods must again “remix” this data.

The “Franka kitchen” domain requires using data from human demonstrators performing a variety of different tasks in a simulated kitchen.

Finally, D4RL includes two tasks that are meant to more accurately reflect potential realistic applications of offline RL, both based on existing driving simulators. One is a first-person driving dataset that utilizes the widely used CARLA simulator developed at Intel, which provides photo-realistic images in realistic driving domains, and the other is a dataset from the Flow traffic control simulator (from UC Berkeley), which requires controlling autonomous vehicles to facilitate effective traffic flow.

D4RL includes datasets based on existing realistic simulators for driving with CARLA (left) and traffic management with Flow (right).

We have packaged these tasks and standardized datasets into an easy-to-use Python package to accelerate research. Furthermore, we provide benchmark numbers for all tasks using relevant prior methods (BC, SAC, BEAR, BRAC, AWR, BCQ), in order to baseline new approaches. We are not the first to propose a benchmark for offline RL: a number of prior works have proposed simple datasets based on running RL algorithms, and several more recent works have proposed datasets with image observations and other features. However, we believe that the more realistic dataset composition in D4RL makes it an effective way to drive progress in the field.

An Improved Algorithm for Offline RL
As we developed the benchmark tasks, we found that existing methods could not solve the more challenging tasks. The central challenge arises from a distributional shift: in order to improve over the historical data, offline RL algorithms must learn to make decisions that differ from the decisions taken in the dataset. However, this can lead to problems when the consequences of a seemingly good decision cannot be deduced from the data — if no agent has taken this particular turn in the maze, how does one know if it leads to the goal or not? Without handling this distributional shift problem, offline RL methods can extrapolate erroneously, making over-optimistic conclusions about the outcomes of rarely seen actions. Contrast this with the online setting, where reward bonuses modeled after curiosity and surprise optimistically bias the agent to explore all potentially rewarding paths. Because the agent receives interactive feedback, if the action turns out to be unrewarding, then it can simply avoid the path in the future.

To address this, we developed conservative Q-learning (CQL), an offline RL algorithm designed to guard against overestimation while avoiding explicit construction of a separate behavior model and without using importance weights. While standard Q-learning (and actor-critic) methods bootstrap from previous estimates, CQL is unique in that it is fundamentally a pessimistic algorithm: it assumes that if a good outcome was not seen for a given action, that action is likely to not be a good one. The central idea of CQL is to learn a lower bound on the policy’s expected return (called the Q-function), instead of learning to approximate the expected return. If we then optimize our policy under this conservative Q-function, we can be confident that its value is no lower than this estimate, preventing errors from overestimation.

We found that CQL attains state-of-the-art results on many of the harder D4RL tasks: CQL outperformed other approaches on the AntMaze, Kitchen tasks, and 6 out of 8 Adroit tasks. In particular, on the AntMaze tasks, which require navigating through a maze with an “Ant” robot, CQL is often the only algorithm that is able to learn non-trivial policies. CQL also performs well on other tasks, including Atari games. On the Atari tasks from Agarwal et al., CQL outperforms prior methods when data is limited (“1%” dataset). Moreover, CQL is simple to implement on top of existing algorithms (e.g., QR-DQN and SAC), without training additional neural networks.

Performance of CQL on Atari games with the 1% dataset from Agarwal et al.

Future Thoughts
We are excited about the fast-moving field of offline RL. While we took a first step towards a standard benchmark, there is clearly still room for improvement. We expect that as algorithms improve, we will need to reevaluate the tasks in the benchmark and develop more challenging tasks. We look forward to working with the community to evolve the benchmark and evaluation protocols. Together, we can bring the rich promises of offline RL to real-world applications.

Acknowledgements
This work was carried out in collaboration with UC Berkeley PhD students Aviral Kumar, Justin Fu, and Aurick Zhou, with contributions from Ofir Nachum from Google Research.


Report: Apple quietly acquired Israel’s Camerai, formerly Tipit, a specialist in AR and camera tech


Apple is well known for picking up smaller startups on the hush-hush to augment its business, and today news leaked out about the latest of these… nearly two years after the fact. Sometime between 2018 and 2019, the iPhone giant reportedly acquired and shut down Camerai, an augmented reality and computer vision company based out of Israel, which used to be called Tipit.

The news was first reported earlier today by Israeli newspaper Calcalist, and we have reached out to ask Apple directly about it. In the meantime, Jonathan (Yehonatan) Rimon, who had been Camerai’s CEO and co-founded the company with Moty Kosharovsky, Erez Tal, and Aaron Wetzler, declined to comment one way or the other on the report to us when we contacted him directly about it. A separate source confirmed the story to us. We’ll update as we learn more.

Calcalist said that the startup sold for several tens of millions of dollars. From being founded in 2015, Camerai had raised around $5 million — including a $2.5 million round in 2017 and another unreported $2.5 million in 2018 — with investors including the Atooro Fund and another called the SKO Fund.

It seems that the acquisition came on the heels of multiple approaches from a number of companies at a time when AR was arguably at a peak of hype and many big tech companies wanted a piece of the action. (Recall that 2018 was the year when Magic Leap raised nearly $1 billion in a single round of funding.) Back in 2018, we heard rumors that those approaching and looking at the startup included Apple, Samsung, and Alibaba.

The Calcalist report said that Camerai employees joined Apple’s computer vision team, and that the company’s technology has been incorporated into Apple products already. It’s not clear specifically where and when, but recall that both iOS 13 and iOS 14 have featured big software updates to the camera.

Camerai had built an SDK and specifically a range of software-based AR tools to help edit and use camera-made images in more sophisticated ways,

Its tech included the ability to detect different objects in the picture, and outline them with precision to alter them cosmetically; the ability to outline and apply filters across the whole image; a “skeleton tracking” neural network API that could detect and draw body joints in real time overlaid on a picture of a human; and its own version of selective focus for enhanced portrait modes (remember this was 2018 and this was not standard on phones at the time). Camerai’s site is shut down, but here are some screenshots of how it all looked, pulled from the Internet Archive:

[gallery ids="2034083,2034084,2034086,2034087"]

Camerai’s acquisition underscores a couple of interesting, and ongoing, trends.

The first of these is in the development of smartphone technology, particularly around cameras. Some of the more interesting innovations in smartphone camera technology have come not out of improvements in hardware, but software, where the application of breakthroughs in artificial intelligence can mean that an existing combination of sensor, lens, and on-phone and cloud processors produce a better and more technically dynamic picture than before.

At a time when smartphone replacement cycles have really slowed down and we are seeing also slower innovation on hardware, bolting on talent and tech created outside the phone companies is one way to gain a competitive edge.

(Separately, I wonder if making cutting edge technology software-based also means that there could be scope in the future for paid updates to older phone models, which could mean more incremental revenues from consumers that don’t want to invest incompletely new devices.)

The second trend that this deal underscores is how Israel remains fertile ground for bigger companies on the hunt to pick up and bolt on technology, and that the secretive approach is likely to remain for some time to come.

“In Israel there are over 350 global corporate companies, from 30 countries, who search for local innovation. Some of them like Apple, MS, Google, even have local R&D [operations],” said Avihai Michaeli, a Tel Aviv-based senior investment banker and startup advisor. “Those global companies look mainly for tech which could serve as its competitive edge. It is not the first time that an acquired startup is asked not to publish it was acquired, nor talk about it.”

Other acquisitions that Apple has made in Israel have included camera module maker LinX, semiconductor startup Anobit, and 3D sensor company PrimeSense.

We’ll update this post as we learn more.


Read Full Article

Yalochat, a fast-growing conversational commerce startup, lands $15 million led by B Capital


Yalochat, a five-year-old, Mexico City-based conversational commerce platform that enables customers like Coca Cola and Walmart to upsell, collect payments, and provide better service to their own customers over WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger and WeChat in China, has closed on $15 million in Series B funding led by B Capital Group.

Sierra Ventures, which led a $10 million Series A financing for the company in early 2019, also participated.

The round isn’t so surprising if Yalochat’s numbers are to be believed. It says that since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, its platform has seen a tenfold increase in volume, and a 650% increase of message volume as more large enterprises  — especially outside of the U.S. — use messaging apps to manage some of their sales operations and much of their customer service.

Yalochat is chasing a fast-growing market, too. According to the 10-year-old, India-based market research company MarketsandMarkets, the conversational AI software market should see $4.8 billion in revenue this year and more than triple that amount by 2025.

Certainly, having conglomerates on board is speeding along the company’s growth.

“With Coca Cola, we started in Brazil and we helped them run their commerce when it comes to talking with small mom-and-pop shops,” says Yalochat founder and CEO Javier Mata, a Columbia University grad who studied engineering and founded three other companies beginning in 2013 before launching Yalochat.

“They had such success running their ordering process that they then took us to Mexico and Colombia, and we’re talking with [them about entering into the] Philippines and India.” Says Mata, “You try to get fast success in one market, then the conglomerate takes you into other areas of business so they can optimize their workflows around sales and customer service in other countries.”

Mata makes the process sound awfully easy, particularly considering that dozens of startups are also focused on conversational commerce and also raising funding right now.

Still, he argues that if you build your product the right way, it becomes a no-brainer for customers.

In pitching companies like Walmart, for example, he says Yalochat would “start with something super simple but high value that they could launch in a week.  We’d say, ‘That process for sales that it has taken you years [to organize], we can get it out for you by Friday.’ Then we’d just do it.

“It was low stakes for them to try us out, and as soon as they saw our conversion rates, we were introduced to other [units] with the corporation.” Says Mata, “I think why a lot of other companies haven’t been successful is that [their tech] is not simple or doesn’t really work. We made ours scalable, easy to launch, and capable of running smoothly without passing that complexity to end users.”

B Capital is plainly buying what Yalochat is selling. Firm cofounder Eduardo Saverin — who famously cofounded Facebook —  calls Mata and his team “phenomenally strong” and suggests there’s little to stop their trajectory right now. “Yalo is an example of a Latin American business that is already today in Asia. And if you’re building  a conversational commerce enablement for large enterprises that redefines the way they touch customers — [meaning] messaging applications, the most engaging medium in the world today —  should that really be confined to Latin America or Asia? Absolutely not.”

Saverin compares the startup to B Capital itself, which has offices in L.A., San Francisco, New York, and Singapore.

The firm has already made bets in the U.S., Europe, and Asia, since getting off the ground in 2015. Now, with Yalo, it has its first investment that’s principally headquartered in Latin America, as well.

“For us,” says Saverin, who grew up in Brazil, “we didn’t start investing everywhere on day one. But that’s the mission.”


Read Full Article

Author and former professional poker player Annie Duke on how conspiracy theories gain ground


Earlier today, Facebook said it had removed hundreds of QAnon groups from its site, and that it’s restricting many more groups, along with hundreds of pages and more than 10,000 Instagram accounts.

As The New York Times observed in its report about the maneuvers, four-year-old QAnon, once a fringe phenomenon, has gone mainstream in recent months despite a wide range of patently outlandish conspiracy theories, including that the world is run by pedophiles trying to damage Donald Trump and that 5G cellular networks are spreading the coronavirus.

How is this happening exactly? Because we happened to be talking this week with the famed former professional poker player turned best-selling author Annie Duke — an academic who now teaches about decision theory, including in her upcoming book “How to Decide: Simple Tools for Making Better Choices” —  we asked for her thoughts about whether and why more people than ever have grown susceptible to conspiracy theories.

She had some interesting things to say that we thought worth sharing. Stay tuned for a longer piece from our conversation about her new book and how it can help both founders and investors.

Our brains don’t like randomness. We as human beings are always trying to figure out this cause and effect that’s just kind of random, yet our brains don’t like; we try to connect dots and create causality where it doesn’t exist.

Belief in conspiracy theories isn’t correlated to intelligence. It’s kind of a different thing that’s going on with how comfortable are you with saying, ‘Shit happens. Sometimes life is random and there’s a lot of luck involved and what are you going to do?’ versus [people who] really want things to make sense and to [maintain] the illusion of control over outcomes.

If you say, ‘These random things can happen like COVID and people are dying and you’re now stuck in your home,’ it’s hard to think about that as luck expelling itself all over you because that has implications [regarding how much control] you have over your destiny. We’re very deterministic in how we  think . . . so we’re always connecting things together to make it feel like decisions and outcomes and things are much more deterministic than they are.

We’re also natural pattern recognizers, even where patterns don’t exist. It’s so we can partly figure out that, ‘When I went to this part of the plains, there were a lot of lions, [so for safety’s sake I shouldn’t go back],’ and so we can recognize faces. It’s [hard] to understand that the world is not as you see it and that we impose things on the world all the time. [Editor’s note: here, Duke points to this visual illusion (below) of two side-by-side cubes that look to be in motion but are not.]

We shouldn’t have so much confidence that we know the truth, but we really believe that the cubes are spinning. So [one solution is] don’t have so much confidence that we know the truth, and know that you’re imposing your reality on the world, as opposed to reality imposing itself on you.

Conspiracy theories are not new, in any case, they’ve been going on a long time. The bigger issue now is how easily they are amplified.

One of the heuristics we have to determine whether something is true or not is processing fluency, meaning how easy is it for us to process a message. If we hear something over and over again, it increases its truthiness, in the words of Stephen Colbert. If you add a picture — so I say giraffes are the only animal that can’t jump, and I include a picture of a giraffe — that increases this truthiness.

You can see where that interacts with social media. With theories plus repetition, it’s harder to figure out fact from fiction.

Again, we’ll have more with Duke soon, including why you’re almost certainly running your meetings the wrong way, and why we dig into losses without exploring enough why things go the right way when they do.


Read Full Article

Big data, small farms and a tale of two tomatoes | Erin Baumgartner

Big data, small farms and a tale of two tomatoes | Erin Baumgartner

The path to better food is paved with data, says entrepreneur Erin Baumgartner. Drawing from her experience running a farm-to-table business, she outlines her plan to help create a healthier, zero-waste food system that values the quality and taste of small, local farm harvests over factory-farmed produce.

https://ift.tt/2YgXzyc

Click this link to view the TED Talk

Google brings emergency alert tools to Search and Maps as fires rage in Northern California


Lightning and a massive heatwave have contributed to raging wildfires in Northern California. By last count, some 11,000 lighting strikes caused hundreds of blazes n a 72 hour period — 26 of which have been classified as major fires, according to officials. The fires have grown to around 124,000 acres, threatening some 25,000 structures in the process.

Google this week has unveiled a tool it’s been working on for some time, aimed at delivering easily accessible information to the impacted areas. Through Search and Maps, the company has started offering up information relevant to the specific region.

Image Credits: Google

At the heart of it  is a digital polygon — a red border that encircles a rough approximation of the active blaze. The object is drawn using data gathered from NOAA’s GOES (Geostationary Satellite Server) system. There’s a full Medium post from the team detailing how that information is gathered and processed if you’re interested in reading it. It’s interesting and pretty technical.

All you need to know as a consumer is that the information will be presented to you through Google Search. A floating notification will also pop up when you search for a location at or near the affected region in Maps. In addition to the name and location of the fire, Google will also offer up an SOS alert offering up relevant news articles and resources from local emergency services.

The information follows a pilot program in 2019 that found the company working with first responders like e California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and Boulder, Colorado’s Office of Emergency Management in order to collect the most relevant information for an emergency scenario.


Read Full Article

DoorDash expands with on-demand grocery delivery


DoorDash is announcing that customers can now order groceries through the DoorDash app from partners including Smart & Final, Meijer and Fresh Thyme. Additional stores like Hy-vee and Gristedes/D’Agnostino are supposed to be added in the next few weeks.

Through these partnerships, DoorDash says it has a delivery footprint covering 75 million Americans in markets like the San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles, Orange County, Sacramento, San Diego, Chicago, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Detroit and Indianapolis.

DoorDash began delivering from a wide range of convenience stores earlier this year. Fuad Hannon, the company’s head of new verticals, also noted that a number of grocery stores are already part of the DoorDash Drive program, a white-label service where DoorDash handles last-mile delivery.

So Hannon said introducing grocery delivery into the DoorDash app itself is a “natural extension” of those efforts. And in contrast to many other grocery services, the company promises to deliver within an hour of your order.

“There’s no scheduling, no delivery slots, no day-long waits,” he said.

To achieve this, Hannon said DoorDash has created “deep partnerships and commercial relationships” with the grocery stores, coordinating on things like inventory management. “Embedded shoppers” hired from a staffing agency handle the shopping in each store, and the groceries are then delivered by DoorDash’s Dashers.

Meijer DoorDash

Image Credits: DoorDash

Hannon said these deliveries will be handled by “the same pool of Dashers” as restaurant delivery. Individual Dashers will decide for themselves when and if they want to take on groceries as well, but he argued that this provides a new opportunity for them, particularly between mealtimes when there’s not much demand for restaurant delivery.

Asked whether there’s any tension with grocery stores in the Drive program who may prefer bringing in customers through their own websites and apps, Hannon argued that customers in the DoorDash app represent “largely different users,” and he said the company is “philosophically agnostic” about whether customers are making purchases through the grocery store’s website/app or through DoorDash.

“DoorDash provides another convenient way for customers to get the value, selection and quality that Smart & Final offers, especially at a time when some are looking to limit trips outside their homes,” said Navin Cotton, Smart & Final’s director of digital commerce, in a statement. “DoorDash’s on-demand grocery service is a nice addition to our online shopping options and with delivery in under an hour, we know Smart & Final customers are going to appreciate it.”

Grocery prices are set by the merchant and should be the same as what you’d find in-store, Hannon said, though perhaps without buy-one-get-one-free offers and others in-store deals. These deliveries are also included in the company’s DashPass subscription, which offers free delivery and reduced service fees.

DoorDash is also offering prepared meals from a longer list of grocery partners, including Wegmans, Hy-Vee, Gelson’s, Kowalski’s, Big Y World Class Markets, Food City, Village Supermarkets, Save Mart, Lucky, Lucky California and Coborn’s.


Read Full Article

Further delay to GDPR enforcement of 2018 Twitter breach


Twitter users have to wait to longer to find out what penalties, if any, the platform faces under the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) for a data breach that dates back around two years.

In the meanwhile the platform has continued to suffer security failures — including, just last month, when hackers gained control of scores of verified accounts and tweeted out a crypto scam.

The tech firm’s lead regulator in the region, Ireland’s Data Protection Commission (DPC), began investigating an earlier Twitter breach in November 2018 — completing the probe earlier this year and submitting a draft decision to other EU DPAs for review in May, just ahead of the second anniversary of the GDPR’s application.

In a statement on the development, Graham Doyle, the DPC’s deputy commissioner, told TechCrunch: “The Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) issued a draft decision to other Concerned Supervisory Authorities (CSAs) on 22 May 2020, in relation to this inquiry into Twitter. A number of objections were raised by CSAs and the DPC engaged in a consultation process with them. However, following consultation a number of objections were maintained and the DPC has now referred the matter to the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) under Article 65 of the GDPR.”

Under the regulation’s one-stop-shop mechanism, cross-border cases are handled by a lead regulator — typically where the business has established its regional base. For many tech companies that means Ireland, so the DPC has an oversized role in the regulation of Silicon Valley’s handling of people’s data.

This means it now has a huge backlog of highly anticipated complaints relating to tech giants including Apple, Facebook, Google, LinkedIn and indeed Twitter. The regulator also continues to face criticism for not yet ‘getting it over the line’ in any of these complaints and investigations pertaining to big tech. So the Twitter breach case is being especially closely watched as it looks set to be the Irish DPC’s first enforcement decision in a cross-border GDPR case.

Last year commissioner Helen Dixon said the first of these decisions would be coming “early” in 2020. In the event, we’re past the halfway mark of the year with still no enforcement to show for it. Though the DPC emphasizes the need to follow due process to ensure final decisions stand up to any challenge.

The latest delay in the Twitter case is a consequence of disagreements between the DPC and other regional watchdogs which, under the rules of GDPR, have a right to raise objections on a draft decision where users in their countries are also affected.

It’s not clear what specific objections have been raised to the DPC’s draft Twitter decision, or indeed what Ireland’s regulator has decided in what should be a relatively straightforward case, given it’s a breach — not a complaint about a core element of a data-mining business model.

Far more complex complaints are still sitting on the DPC’s desk. Doyle confirmed that a complaint pertaining to WhatsApp’s legal basis for sharing user data with Facebook remains the next most progressed in the stack, for example.

So, given the DPC’s Twitter breach draft decision hasn’t been universally accepted by Europe’s data watchdogs it’s all but inevitable Facebook-WhatsApp will go through the same objections process. Ergo, expect more delays.

Article 65 of the GDPR sets out a process for handling objections on draft decisions. It allows for one month for DPAs to reach a two-thirds majority, with the possibility for a further extension of another month — which would push a decision on the Twitter case into late October.

If there’s still not enough votes in favor at that point, a further two weeks are allowed for EDPB members to reach a simple majority. If DPAs are still split the Board chair, currently Andrea Jelinek, has the deciding vote. So the body’s role in major decisions over big tech looks set to be very key.

We’ve reached out to the EDPB with questions related to the Twitter objections and will update this report with any response.

The Article 65 process exists to try to find consensus across a patchwork of national and regional data supervisors. But it won’t silence critics who argue the GDPR is not able to be applied fast enough to uphold EU citizens’ rights in the face of fast-iterating data-mining giants.

To wit: Given the latest developments, a final decision on the Twitter breach could be delayed until November — a full two years after the investigation began.

Earlier this summer a two-year review of GDPR by the European Commission, meanwhile, highlighted a lack of uniformly vigorous enforcement. Though commissioners signalled a willingness to wait and see how the one-stop-shop mechanism runs its course on cross-border cases, while admitting there’s a need to reinforce cooperation and co-ordination on cross border issues.

“We need to be sure that it’s possible for all the national authorities to work together. And in the network of national authorities it’s the case — and with the Board [EDPB] it’s possible to organize that. So we’ll continue to work on it,” justice commissioner, Didier Reynders, said in June.

“The best answer will be a decision from the Irish data protection authority about important cases,” he added then.


Read Full Article

How to make money in an online casino?


There are certain aspects to consider when you start playing online. If you want to earn real money and feel safe, here are some things to check out before you create an online account: PLAY DIFFERENT ONLINE GAMES Before creating an online account, it is important to know what your favorite games are, and if […]

The post How to make money in an online casino? appeared first on ALL TECH BUZZ.


How to Collect More Emails in 2020: 5 Powerful Methods


Before we get into how to collect more emails, it is important to understand why we need to collect email addresses. Email is 40% more effective than acquiring customers via social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter. Whether you are a big company or a budding brand, chances are your business effects include a rock-solid […]

The post How to Collect More Emails in 2020: 5 Powerful Methods appeared first on ALL TECH BUZZ.


10 Best Web Archive Websites in 2020


If you are preparing to start a new website, then you might be looking for ways to beat the competition. To overcome the competition, you have to offer better content than your competitors. In that case, one needs to look into the history of the competitor’s website to get the much-required information. Things like site […]

The post 10 Best Web Archive Websites in 2020 appeared first on ALL TECH BUZZ.


AI-based customer engagement platform iKala raises $17 million to expand in Southeast Asia


Taiwanese startup iKala, which offers an artificial intelligence-based customer acquisition and engagement platform, will expand into new Southeast Asian markets after raising a $17 million Series B. The round was led by Wistron Digital Technology Holding Company, the investment arm of the electronics manufacturer, with participation from returning investors Hotung Investment Holdings Limited and Pacific Venture Partners. It brings iKala’s total raised so far to $30.3 million.

The new funding will be used to launch in Indonesia and Malaysia, and expand in markets where iKala already operates, including Singapore, Thailand, Hong Kong, the Philippines, Vietnam and Japan. Wistron Digital Technology Holding Company, which also offers big data analytics, will serve as a strategic investor, and this also marks the Taiwanese firm’s entry into Southeast Asia.

IKala’s products are targeted toward e-commerce companies, and include KOL Radar, for influencer marketing, and Shoplus, a social commerce service focused on Southeast Asian markets.

In a statement about the funding, iKala board member Lee-feng Chien, former managing director at Google Taiwan, said, “Taiwan has an excellent reputation for having some of the best high-tech talents in both hardware and software around the region. With Wistron as a strategic partner, iKala can become a major driving force for transforming Taiwan into an AI industry and talent hub in Asia.”

While Taiwan’s technology industry is best-known for hardware, especially semiconductor manufacturers like Foxconn and TSMC, a new crop of startups are helping the country establish a reputation for AI prowess.

In addition to iKala, these include Appier, which also provides a customer analytics, and enterprise translation platform WritePath. Big American tech companies, including Amazon, Google and Microsoft, have also set up AI-focused research and development centers in Taiwan, drawing on the country’s engineering talent and government programs.


Read Full Article

Boat Puzzle


Boat Puzzle

Understanding Deep Learning on Controlled Noisy Labels


The success of deep neural networks depends on access to high-quality labeled training data, as the presence of label errors (label noise) in training data can greatly reduce the accuracy of models on clean test data. Unfortunately, large training datasets almost always contain examples with inaccurate or incorrect labels. This leads to a paradox: on one hand, large datasets are necessary to train better deep networks, while on the other hand, deep networks tend to memorize training label noise, resulting in poorer model performance in practice.

The research community has recognized the importance of this problem, introducing works attempting to understand noisy training labels, e.g., by Arpit et al., as well as mitigation strategies, such as MentorNet or co-teaching, to overcome them. Controlled experiments play a crucial role in understanding noisy labels by studying the impact of the noise level — the percentage of examples with incorrect labels in the dataset — on model performance. However, current experiments have only been performed on synthetic labels, in which noisy examples have randomly assigned labels, not real-world label noise, which follows a different noise distribution. Such studies may then result in very different or even contradictory findings about noisy labels compared to practical experience. In addition, methods that perform well on synthetic noise may not work as well on real-world noisy labels.

In “Beyond Synthetic Noise: Deep Learning on Controlled Noisy Labels”, published at ICML 2020, we make three contributions towards better understanding deep learning on non-synthetic noisy labels. First, we establish the first controlled dataset and benchmark of realistic, real-world label noise sourced from the web (i.e., web label noise). Second, we propose a simple but highly effective method to overcome both synthetic and real-world noisy labels. Finally, we conduct the largest study to date that compares synthetic and web label noise across a wide variety of settings.

Properties of Synthetic vs Real-World (Web) Label Noise
There are a number of differences between the distribution of images with synthetic versus real-world (web) label noise. First, images with web label noise tend to be more consistent, visually or semantically, with the true positive images. Second, synthetic label noise is at class-level (all examples in the same class are equally noisy), whereas real-world label noise is at instance-level (certain images are more likely to be mislabelled than others, regardless of the associated class). For example, images of “Honda Civic” and “Honda Accord” are more often confused when the images are taken from the side than when the vehicles are imaged from the front. Third, images with real-world label noise come from an open class vocabulary that may not overlap with the class vocabulary of a specific dataset. For example, the web noisy images of “ladybug” include classes such as “fly” and other bugs that are not included in the class list of the dataset being used. The benchmark for controlled label noise will help provide better quantitative understanding of the differences between synthetic and real-world web label noise.

Benchmark for Controlled Label Noise from the Web
The benchmark in this work is built on two public datasets: Mini-ImageNet, for coarse-grained image classification, and Stanford Cars, for fine-grained image classification. We gradually replace clean images in these datasets with incorrectly labeled images gathered from the web, following standard methods for the construction of synthetic datasets.

To do this, we collect images from the web using the class name (e.g., “ladybug”) as a keyword — an automatic approach to collect noisy labeled images from the web without manual annotations. Each retrieved image is then examined by 3-5 annotators using Google Cloud Labeling Service who identify whether or not the web label given is correct, yielding nearly 213k annotated images. We use these web images with incorrect labels to replace a percentage of the clean training images in the original Mini-ImageNet and Stanford Cars datasets. We create 10 different datasets with progressively higher levels of label noise (from 0% clean data to 80% data with erroneous labels). The datasets have been open-sourced at our Controlled Noisy Web Labels website.

Comparison of synthetic label noise and web label noise. From left to right, columns are true positive images in the Mini-ImageNet or Stanford Cars dataset, images with incorrect synthetic labels, and images with incorrect web labels (collected in the present work).

MentorMix: A Simple Robust Learning Method
Given a dataset of some unknown noise level, our goal is to train a robust model that can generalize well on the clean test data. Building on two existing techniques, MentorNet and Mixup, we introduce a simple yet effective method called MentorMix, which works with a given model of interest to overcome both synthetic and real-world noisy labels.

MentorMix is an iterative approach that comprises four steps: weight, sample, mixup, and weight again. In the first step, a weight is computed for every example in a mini-batch by a MentorNet network, which can be tailored to the task at hand, and the weights are normalized into a distribution. In practice, the goal is to assign high weights for correctly labeled examples and zero weights for incorrectly labeled examples. In reality, we don't know which are correct and which are incorrect, so MentorNet weights are based on approximations. In the example here, MentorNet uses the StudentNet training loss to determine the weights in the distribution. Next, for each example, we use importance sampling to select another example in the same mini-batch according to the distribution. As examples with higher weights tend to have the correct label, they are favored in the sampling procedure. We then use Mixup to mix the original and sampled examples to regularize the model prediction between noisy training examples. Finally, we may compute another weight for the mixed example to scale the final loss. The impact of this second weighting strategy becomes more pronounced for high noise levels. Conceptually, the above steps implement a new robust loss, which turns out to be more resilient to noisy training labels. More discussion on this topic can be found in our paper.

The animation below illustrates the four key steps in MentorMix, where StudentNet is the model to be trained on noisy labeled data. We employ a very simple version of MentorNet, as described by Jiang et al., to compute the weight for each example.

Illustration of four steps in the MentorMix method: weight, sample, mixup, and weight again.

Evaluation
We evaluate MentorMix on five datasets including CIFAR 10/100 with synthetic label noise, and WebVision 1.0, a large dataset of 2.2 million images with real-world noisy labels. MentorMix consistently yields improved results on the CIFAR 10/100 datasets and achieves the best published result on the WebVision dataset, improving the previous best method by a significant ~3% in terms of the top-1 classification accuracy on the ImageNet ILSVRC12 validation set.

Our model is trained only on the WebVision 2.2 million noisy training sample and is tested on the ImageNet ILSVRC12 validation set. The baseline models reported are (Lee et al. 2018), (MentorNet 2018), and (Guo et al. 2018).

New Findings on Noisy Labels from the Web
This work represents the largest study to date into understanding deep neural networks trained on noisy labels. We propose three new findings on web label noise:

  • Deep neural networks generalize much better on web label noise

    While it is well known that deep neural networks generalize poorly on synthetic label noise, our results suggest that deep neural networks generalize much better on web label noise. For example, the classification accuracy of a network trained on the Stanford Cars dataset using the 60% web label noise level is 0.66, much higher than that for the same network trained at the same 60% level of synthetic noise, which achieves only 0.09. This pattern is consistent across our two datasets using both fine-tuning and training from scratch.

  • Deep neural networks may NOT learn patterns first when trained on web label noise

    Our common understanding is that deep neural networks learn patterns first — an interesting property in which DNNs are able to automatically capture generalizable “patterns” in the early training stage before memorizing noisy training labels. Because of this, early stopping is commonly used for training on noisy data. However, our results suggest deep neural networks may not learn patterns first when trained using datasets with web label noise, at least for the fine-grained classification task, suggesting that early stopping may not be effective on real-world label noise from the web.

  • ImageNet architectures generalize on noisy training labels when the networks are fine-tuned

    Kornblith et al. (2019) found that fine-tuning more advanced architectures trained on ImageNet tend to perform better on downstream tasks that have clean training labels. Our results extend this finding to noisy training data, showing that a better pre-trained architecture that exhibits better performance when pre-trained on ImageNet is likely to perform better even when it is fine-tuned on noisy training labels.

Summary
Based on our findings, we have the following practical recommendations for training deep neural networks on noisy data.

  1. A simple way to deal with noisy labels is to fine-tune a model that is pre-trained on clean datasets, like ImageNet. The better the pre-trained model is, the better it may generalize on downstream noisy training tasks.
  2. Early stopping may not be effective on the real-world label noise from the web.
  3. Methods that perform well on synthetic noise may not work as well on the real-world noisy labels from the web.
  4. The label noise from the web appears to be less harmful, yet it is more difficult for our current robust learning methods to tackle. This encourages more future research to be carried out on controlled real-world label noise.
  5. The proposed MentorMix can better overcome both synthetic and real-world noisy labels.

The code of MentorMix is available on GitHub, the datasets are on our Dataset Website.

Aknowledgements
This research was conducted by Lu Jiang, Di Huang, Mason Liu, and Weilong Yang. We'd like to thank Boqing Gong and Fei Sha for constructive feedback. Additional thanks go to the leadership Andrew Moore for supporting our data labeling effort, along with Tomas Izo and Rahul Sukthankar for help in releasing the dataset.


Just what would an enterprise company like Microsoft or Oracle do with TikTok?


By now you’ve probably heard that under pressure from the current administration, TikTok owner ByteDance is putting the viral video service up for sale, and surprisingly a couple of big name enterprise companies are interested. These organizations are better known for the kind of tech that would bore the average TikTok user to tears. Yet, stories have persisted that Microsoft and even Oracle are sniffing around the video social network.

As TechCrunch’s Danny Crichton pointed out last week, bankers involved in the sale have a lot of motivation to leak rumors to the press to drive up the price of TikTok. That means none of this might be true, yet the rumors aren’t going away. It begs the question why would a company like Oracle or Microsoft be interested in a property like TikTok?

For starters, Oracle is a lot more than the database company it was known for in the past. These days, it has its fingers in many, many pies including marketing automation and cloud infrastructure services. In April, as the pandemic was just beginning to heat up, Zoom surprised just about everyone when it announced a partnership with Oracle’s cloud arm.

Oracle isn’t really even on the board when it comes to cloud infrastructure market share, where it is well behind rivals AWS, Microsoft, Google, Alibaba and IBM, wallowing somewhere in single digit market share. Oracle wants to be a bigger player.

Meanwhile, Microsoft has successfully transitioned to the cloud as well as any company, but still remains far behind AWS in the cloud infrastructure market. It wants to close the gap with AWS and owning TikTok could get it closer to that goal faster.

Simply put, says Holger Mueller, an analyst at Constellation Research, if Oracle combined Zoom and TikTok, it could have itself a couple of nice anchor clients. Yes, like the proverbial mall trying to attract Target and Nordstrom, apparently Oracle wants to do the same with its cloud service, and if it has to buy the tenant, so be it.

“TikTok will add plenty of load to their infrastructure service. That’s what matters to them with viral loads preferred. If Microsoft gets TikTok it could boost their usage by between 2% and 5%, while for Oracle it could be as much 10%,” he said. He says the difference is that Oracle has a much smaller user base now, so it would relatively boost its usage all the more.

As Mueller points out with the government helping push TikTok’s owner to make the sale, it’s a huge opportunity for a company like Oracle or Microsoft, and why the rumors have weight. “It’s very plausible from a cloud business perspective, and plausible from a business opportunity perspective created by the US government,” he said.

While it could make sense to attract a large user base to your systems to drive up usage and market share in that way, Brent Leary, founder and principal analyst at CRM Essentials, says that just by having a large U.S. tech company buy the video app, it could make it less attractive to the very users Microsoft or Oracle is hoping to capture.

“An old guard enterprise tech company buying Tiktok would likely lessen the appeal of current users. Younger people are already leaving Facebook because the old folks have taken it over,” Leary said. And that could mean young users, who are boosting the platform’s stats today could jump ship to whatever is the next big social phenomenon.

It’s worth pointing out that just today, the president indicated support for Oracle, according to a Wall Street Journal report. The publication also reported that Oracle’s billionaire owner Larry Ellison is a big supporter of the president, having thrown him a fundraiser for his reelection bid at his house earlier this year. Oracle CEO Safra Catz also has ties to the administration, having served on the transition team in 2016.

It’s unclear whether these companies have a genuine interest, but the general feeling is someone is going to buy the service, and whoever does could get a big boost in users simply by using some percentage of their cash hordes to get there. By the way, another company with reported interest is Twitter. Certainly putting the two social platforms together could create a mega platform to compete more directly with Facebook.

You might see other big names trying to boost cloud infrastructure usage like IBM or Google enter the fray.  Perhaps even Amazon could make an offer to cement its lead, although if the deal has to go through the federal government, that makes it less likely given the tense relationship between Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and the president that surfaced during the Pentagon JEDI cloud contract drama.

Apple has already indicated that in spite of having the largest cash on hand of any company with over $193 billion, give or take, it apparently isn’t interested.  Apple may not be, but somebody surely is, even some companies you couldn’t imagine owning a property like this.


Read Full Article

Twitter claims increased enforcement of hate speech and abuse policies in last half of 2019


Twitter has given its biannual transparency reports a new home with today’s launch of the Twitter Transparency Center, which the company says was designed to make the reporting more easily understood and accessible. The launch was timed alongside the belated release of Twitter’s latest transparency report covering the second half of 2019. The company attributed the delay to the COVID-19 health crisis and its work in getting the new Transparency Center up and running. The report touts Twitter’s increasing efforts in enforcing its policies, including a 95% increase in accounts actioned for violating its abuse policy, a 47% increase in account locks and suspensions, and a 54% increase in accounts actioned for violating hateful conduct policies, among others.

The company claims its ability to “proactively” surface content violations for human review has helped it increase enforcement of its rules, along with more detailed policies, improved reporting tools, and other factors.

As a result, this period saw the largest increase in the number of accounts actioned under Twitter’s abuse policies — a metric that could speak to better technology, as Twitter claims, but also perhaps hints at the devolving nature of online discourse.

Meanwhile, Twitter attributed the increase in actions taken on accounts demonstrating hateful conduct, in part, to its new “dehumanization policy” announced on July 9, 2019.

Twitter increased enforcement of its rules in other areas during this reporting period, including the posting of sensitive media/adult content (enforcement actions were up 39%), suicide & self-harm (enforcement actions up 29%), doxxing (enforcement actions up 41%), and non-consensual nudity (enforcement actions up 109%). The only area to see a decline was violent threats, which saw a 5% decrease in the number of accounts actioned for policy violations.

Twitter also actioned 60,807 accounts for violating policies around regulated goods or services.

Online harassment has been a significant challenge for Twitter as it has grown. The social network now encompasses a wider swath of the general public, compared with its early days when tech enthusiasts knew it as twttr, a sort of public-facing SMS. Today, Twitter’s idealistic goal of being an “online public town square” is bumping up against the limitations of that model, which is also increasingly criticized as a flawed or even delusional sort of analogy for what Twitter has become.

Twitter, like much of social media, can over-amplify fringe beliefs, controversy, and toxic content, to the detriment of conversation health. It can help polarize users’ opinions. And it serves as a breeding ground for cancel culture.

The company itself, as of late, seems to be waking up to the problem of putting the world together in one room to debate ideas, and the ramifications of amplifying misinformation that results in.

It suspended accounts from the fringe conspiracy movement, QAnon, in July. It has also flagged and screened Trump’s tweets and briefly froze his ability to share misinformation. On the product side, Twitter rolled out a tool that let users hide replies that don’t add value to conversations and, just last week, publicly launched a feature that lets users only tweet with friends and followers, instead of with the general public.

Abuse policy enforcement isn’t the only big change that took place in the last half of 2019. Government requests for user data also increased, Twitter found.

Twitter says that the U.S. made up the highest percentage of legal requests for information during the reporting period, accounting for 26% of all global requests. Japan was second, comprising 22% of information requests. Overall, government requests grew 21% in the period July 1 to December 31, 2019, and the aggregate number of accounts specified in the requests grew 63%.

Both metrics were the largest Twitter has seen since it began transparency reporting in 2012, it noted.

Twitter also saw 27,538 legal demands to remove content specifying 98,595 accounts — again, the largest number to date. 86% of these demands came from Japan, Russia, and Turkey.

“Our work to increase transparency efforts across the company is tireless and constant. We will continue to work on increasing awareness and understanding about how our policies work and our practices around content moderation, data disclosures and other critical areas,” the company blog post about the new center explained. “In addition, we will take every opportunity to highlight the actions of law enforcement, governments, and other organizations that impact Twitter and the people who use our service across the world,” it noted.

More metrics, including those focused on spam, terrorism, child exploitation and extremism, are available on the new Twitter Transparency Center.


Read Full Article