This is a simple machine learning project using classifiers for predicting factors which affect student grades, using data from CSV file

Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, p. 1. Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 55. Definition of AI as the study of intelligent agents: Poole, Mackworth & Goebel (1998), which provides the version that is used in this article. These authors use the term "computational intelligence" as a synonym for artificial intelligence.[1] Russell & Norvig (2003) (who prefer the term "rational agent") and write "The whole-agent view is now widely accepted in the field".[2] Nilsson 1998 Legg & Hutter 2007 Russell & Norvig 2009, p. 2. McCorduck 2004, p. 204 Maloof, Mark. "Artificial Intelligence: An Introduction, p. 37" (PDF). georgetown.edu. Archived (PDF) from the original on 25 August 2018. "How AI Is Getting Groundbreaking Changes In Talent Management And HR Tech". Hackernoon. Archived from the original on 11 September 2019. Retrieved 14 February 2020. Schank, Roger C. (1991). "Where's the AI". AI magazine. Vol. 12 no. 4. p. 38. Russell & Norvig 2009. "AlphaGo – Google DeepMind". Archived from the original on 10 March 2016. Allen, Gregory (April 2020). "Department of Defense Joint AI Center - Understanding AI Technology" (PDF). AI.mil - The official site of the Department of Defense Joint Artificial Intelligence Center. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 April 2020. Retrieved 25 April 2020. Optimism of early AI: * Herbert Simon quote: Simon 1965, p. 96 quoted in Crevier 1993, p. 109. * Marvin Minsky quote: Minsky 1967, p. 2 quoted in Crevier 1993, p. 109. Boom of the 1980s: rise of expert systems, Fifth Generation Project, Alvey, MCC, SCI: * McCorduck 2004, pp. 426–441 * Crevier 1993, pp. 161–162,197–203, 211, 240 * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 24 * NRC 1999, pp. 210–211 * Newquist 1994, pp. 235–248 First AI Winter, Mansfield Amendment, Lighthill report * Crevier 1993, pp. 115–117 * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 22 * NRC 1999, pp. 212–213 * Howe 1994 * Newquist 1994, pp. 189–201 Second AI winter: * McCorduck 2004, pp. 430–435 * Crevier 1993, pp. 209–210 * NRC 1999, pp. 214–216 * Newquist 1994, pp. 301–318 AI becomes hugely successful in the early 21st century * Clark 2015 Pamela McCorduck (2004, p. 424) writes of "the rough shattering of AI in subfields—vision, natural language, decision theory, genetic algorithms, robotics ... and these with own sub-subfield—that would hardly have anything to say to each other." This list of intelligent traits is based on the topics covered by the major AI textbooks, including: * Russell & Norvig 2003 * Luger & Stubblefield 2004 * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998 * Nilsson 1998 Kolata 1982. Maker 2006. Biological intelligence vs. intelligence in general: Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 2–3, who make the analogy with aeronautical engineering. McCorduck 2004, pp. 100–101, who writes that there are "two major branches of artificial intelligence: one aimed at producing intelligent behavior regardless of how it was accomplished, and the other aimed at modeling intelligent processes found in nature, particularly human ones." Kolata 1982, a paper in Science, which describes McCarthy's indifference to biological models. Kolata quotes McCarthy as writing: "This is AI, so we don't care if it's psychologically real".[19] McCarthy recently reiterated his position at the AI@50 conference where he said "Artificial intelligence is not, by definition, simulation of human intelligence".[20]. Neats vs. scruffies: * McCorduck 2004, pp. 421–424, 486–489 * Crevier 1993, p. 168 * Nilsson 1983, pp. 10–11 Symbolic vs. sub-symbolic AI: * Nilsson (1998, p. 7), who uses the term "sub-symbolic". General intelligence (strong AI) is discussed in popular introductions to AI: * Kurzweil 1999 and Kurzweil 2005 See the Dartmouth proposal, under Philosophy, below. McCorduck 2004, p. 34. McCorduck 2004, p. xviii. McCorduck 2004, p. 3. McCorduck 2004, pp. 340–400. This is a central idea of Pamela McCorduck's Machines Who Think. She writes: "I like to think of artificial intelligence as the scientific apotheosis of a venerable cultural tradition."[26] "Artificial intelligence in one form or another is an idea that has pervaded Western intellectual history, a dream in urgent need of being realized."[27] "Our history is full of attempts—nutty, eerie, comical, earnest, legendary and real—to make artificial intelligences, to reproduce what is the essential us—bypassing the ordinary means. Back and forth between myth and reality, our imaginations supplying what our workshops couldn't, we have engaged for a long time in this odd form of self-reproduction."[28] She traces the desire back to its Hellenistic roots and calls it the urge to "forge the Gods."[29] "Stephen Hawking believes AI could be mankind's last accomplishment". BetaNews. 21 October 2016. Archived from the original on 28 August 2017. Lombardo P, Boehm I, Nairz K (2020). "RadioComics – Santa Claus and the future of radiology". Eur J Radiol. 122 (1): 108771. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108771. PMID 31835078. Ford, Martin; Colvin, Geoff (6 September 2015). "Will robots create more jobs than they destroy?". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 16 June 2018. Retrieved 13 January 2018. AI applications widely used behind the scenes: * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 28 * Kurzweil 2005, p. 265 * NRC 1999, pp. 216–222 * Newquist 1994, pp. 189–201 AI in myth: * McCorduck 2004, pp. 4–5 * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 939 AI in early science fiction. * McCorduck 2004, pp. 17–25 Formal reasoning: * Berlinski, David (2000). The Advent of the Algorithm. Harcourt Books. ISBN 978-0-15-601391-8. OCLC 46890682. Archived from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 22 August 2020. Turing, Alan (1948), "Machine Intelligence", in Copeland, B. Jack (ed.), The Essential Turing: The ideas that gave birth to the computer age, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 412, ISBN 978-0-19-825080-7 Russell & Norvig 2009, p. 16. Dartmouth conference: * McCorduck 2004, pp. 111–136 * Crevier 1993, pp. 47–49, who writes "the conference is generally recognized as the official birthdate of the new science." * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 17, who call the conference "the birth of artificial intelligence." * NRC 1999, pp. 200–201 McCarthy, John (1988). "Review of The Question of Artificial Intelligence". Annals of the History of Computing. 10 (3): 224–229., collected in McCarthy, John (1996). "10. Review of The Question of Artificial Intelligence". Defending AI Research: A Collection of Essays and Reviews. CSLI., p. 73, "[O]ne of the reasons for inventing the term "artificial intelligence" was to escape association with "cybernetics". Its concentration on analog feedback seemed misguided, and I wished to avoid having either to accept Norbert (not Robert) Wiener as a guru or having to argue with him." Hegemony of the Dartmouth conference attendees: * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 17, who write "for the next 20 years the field would be dominated by these people and their students." * McCorduck 2004, pp. 129–130 Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 18. Schaeffer J. (2009) Didn't Samuel Solve That Game?. In: One Jump Ahead. Springer, Boston, MA Samuel, A. L. (July 1959). "Some Studies in Machine Learning Using the Game of Checkers". IBM Journal of Research and Development. 3 (3): 210–229. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.368.2254. doi:10.1147/rd.33.0210. "Golden years" of AI (successful symbolic reasoning programs 1956–1973): * McCorduck 2004, pp. 243–252 * Crevier 1993, pp. 52–107 * Moravec 1988, p. 9 * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 18–21 The programs described are Arthur Samuel's checkers program for the IBM 701, Daniel Bobrow's STUDENT, Newell and Simon's Logic Theorist and Terry Winograd's SHRDLU. DARPA pours money into undirected pure research into AI during the 1960s: * McCorduck 2004, p. 131 * Crevier 1993, pp. 51, 64–65 * NRC 1999, pp. 204–205 AI in England: * Howe 1994 Lighthill 1973. Expert systems: * ACM 1998, I.2.1 * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 22–24 * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 227–331 * Nilsson 1998, chpt. 17.4 * McCorduck 2004, pp. 327–335, 434–435 * Crevier 1993, pp. 145–62, 197–203 * Newquist 1994, pp. 155–183 Mead, Carver A.; Ismail, Mohammed (8 May 1989). Analog VLSI Implementation of Neural Systems (PDF). The Kluwer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science. 80. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-1639-8. ISBN 978-1-4613-1639-8. Archived from the original (PDF) on 6 November 2019. Retrieved 24 January 2020. Formal methods are now preferred ("Victory of the neats"): * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 25–26 * McCorduck 2004, pp. 486–487 McCorduck 2004, pp. 480–483. Markoff 2011. "Ask the AI experts: What's driving today's progress in AI?". McKinsey & Company. Archived from the original on 13 April 2018. Retrieved 13 April 2018. Administrator. "Kinect's AI breakthrough explained". i-programmer.info. Archived from the original on 1 February 2016. Rowinski, Dan (15 January 2013). "Virtual Personal Assistants & The Future Of Your Smartphone [Infographic]". ReadWrite. Archived from the original on 22 December 2015. "Artificial intelligence: Google's AlphaGo beats Go master Lee Se-dol". BBC News. 12 March 2016. Archived from the original on 26 August 2016. Retrieved 1 October 2016. Metz, Cade (27 May 2017). "After Win in China, AlphaGo's Designers Explore New AI". Wired. Archived from the original on 2 June 2017. "World's Go Player Ratings". May 2017. Archived from the original on 1 April 2017. "柯洁迎19岁生日 雄踞人类世界排名第一已两年" (in Chinese). May 2017. Archived from the original on 11 August 2017. Clark, Jack (8 December 2015). "Why 2015 Was a Breakthrough Year in Artificial Intelligence". Bloomberg News. Archived from the original on 23 November 2016. Retrieved 23 November 2016. After a half-decade of quiet breakthroughs in artificial intelligence, 2015 has been a landmark year. Computers are smarter and learning faster than ever. "Reshaping Business With Artificial Intelligence". MIT Sloan Management Review. Archived from the original on 19 May 2018. Retrieved 2 May 2018. Lorica, Ben (18 December 2017). "The state of AI adoption". O'Reilly Media. Archived from the original on 2 May 2018. Retrieved 2 May 2018. Allen, Gregory (6 February 2019). "Understanding China's AI Strategy". Center for a New American Security. Archived from the original on 17 March 2019. "Review | How two AI superpowers – the U.S. and China – battle for supremacy in the field". Washington Post. 2 November 2018. Archived from the original on 4 November 2018. Retrieved 4 November 2018. at 10:11, Alistair Dabbs 22 Feb 2019. "Artificial Intelligence: You know it isn't real, yeah?". www.theregister.co.uk. Archived from the original on 21 May 2020. Retrieved 22 August 2020. "Stop Calling it Artificial Intelligence". Archived from the original on 2 December 2019. Retrieved 1 December 2019. "AI isn't taking over the world – it doesn't exist yet". GBG Global website. Archived from the original on 11 August 2020. Retrieved 22 August 2020. Kaplan, Andreas; Haenlein, Michael (1 January 2019). "Siri, Siri, in my hand: Who's the fairest in the land? On the interpretations, illustrations, and implications of artificial intelligence". Business Horizons. 62 (1): 15–25. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2018.08.004. Domingos 2015, Chapter 5. Domingos 2015, Chapter 7. Lindenbaum, M., Markovitch, S., & Rusakov, D. (2004). Selective sampling for nearest neighbor classifiers. Machine learning, 54(2), 125–152. Domingos 2015, Chapter 1. Intractability and efficiency and the combinatorial explosion: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 9, 21–22 Domingos 2015, Chapter 2, Chapter 3. Hart, P. E.; Nilsson, N. J.; Raphael, B. (1972). "Correction to "A Formal Basis for the Heuristic Determination of Minimum Cost Paths"". SIGART Newsletter (37): 28–29. doi:10.1145/1056777.1056779. S2CID 6386648. Domingos 2015, Chapter 2, Chapter 4, Chapter 6. "Can neural network computers learn from experience, and if so, could they ever become what we would call 'smart'?". Scientific American. 2018. Archived from the original on 25 March 2018. Retrieved 24 March 2018. Domingos 2015, Chapter 6, Chapter 7. Domingos 2015, p. 286. "Single pixel change fools AI programs". BBC News. 3 November 2017. Archived from the original on 22 March 2018. Retrieved 12 March 2018. "AI Has a Hallucination Problem That's Proving Tough to Fix". WIRED. 2018. Archived from the original on 12 March 2018. Retrieved 12 March 2018. Matti, D.; Ekenel, H. K.; Thiran, J. P. (2017). Combining LiDAR space clustering and convolutional neural networks for pedestrian detection. 2017 14th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Video and Signal Based Surveillance (AVSS). pp. 1–6. arXiv:1710.06160. doi:10.1109/AVSS.2017.8078512. ISBN 978-1-5386-2939-0. S2CID 2401976. Ferguson, Sarah; Luders, Brandon; Grande, Robert C.; How, Jonathan P. (2015). Real-Time Predictive Modeling and Robust Avoidance of Pedestrians with Uncertain, Changing Intentions. Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics XI. Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics. 107. Springer, Cham. pp. 161–177. arXiv:1405.5581. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-16595-0_10. ISBN 978-3-319-16594-3. S2CID 8681101. "Cultivating Common Sense | DiscoverMagazine.com". Discover Magazine. 2017. Archived from the original on 25 March 2018. Retrieved 24 March 2018. Davis, Ernest; Marcus, Gary (24 August 2015). "Commonsense reasoning and commonsense knowledge in artificial intelligence". Communications of the ACM. 58 (9): 92–103. doi:10.1145/2701413. S2CID 13583137. Archived from the original on 22 August 2020. Retrieved 6 April 2020. Winograd, Terry (January 1972). "Understanding natural language". Cognitive Psychology. 3 (1): 1–191. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(72)90002-3. "Don't worry: Autonomous cars aren't coming tomorrow (or next year)". Autoweek. 2016. Archived from the original on 25 March 2018. Retrieved 24 March 2018. Knight, Will (2017). "Boston may be famous for bad drivers, but it's the testing ground for a smarter self-driving car". MIT Technology Review. Archived from the original on 22 August 2020. Retrieved 27 March 2018. Prakken, Henry (31 August 2017). "On the problem of making autonomous vehicles conform to traffic law". Artificial Intelligence and Law. 25 (3): 341–363. doi:10.1007/s10506-017-9210-0. Lieto, Antonio (May 2018). "The knowledge level in cognitive architectures: Current limitations and possible developments". Cognitive Systems Research. 48: 39–55. doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2017.05.001. hdl:2318/1665207. S2CID 206868967. Problem solving, puzzle solving, game playing and deduction: * Russell & Norvig 2003, chpt. 3–9, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, chpt. 2,3,7,9, * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, chpt. 3,4,6,8, * Nilsson 1998, chpt. 7–12 Uncertain reasoning: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 452–644, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 345–395, * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 333–381, * Nilsson 1998, chpt. 19 Psychological evidence of sub-symbolic reasoning: * Wason & Shapiro (1966) showed that people do poorly on completely abstract problems, but if the problem is restated to allow the use of intuitive social intelligence, performance dramatically improves. (See Wason selection task) * Kahneman, Slovic & Tversky (1982) have shown that people are terrible at elementary problems that involve uncertain reasoning. (See list of cognitive biases for several examples). * Lakoff & Núñez (2000) have controversially argued that even our skills at mathematics depend on knowledge and skills that come from "the body", i.e. sensorimotor and perceptual skills. (See Where Mathematics Comes From) Knowledge representation: * ACM 1998, I.2.4, * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 320–363, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 23–46, 69–81, 169–196, 235–277, 281–298, 319–345, * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 227–243, * Nilsson 1998, chpt. 18 Knowledge engineering: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 260–266, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 199–233, * Nilsson 1998, chpt. ≈17.1–17.4 Representing categories and relations: Semantic networks, description logics, inheritance (including frames and scripts): * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 349–354, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 174–177, * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 248–258, * Nilsson 1998, chpt. 18.3 Representing events and time:Situation calculus, event calculus, fluent calculus (including solving the frame problem): * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 328–341, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 281–298, * Nilsson 1998, chpt. 18.2 Causal calculus: * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 335–337 Representing knowledge about knowledge: Belief calculus, modal logics: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 341–344, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 275–277 Sikos, Leslie F. (June 2017). Description Logics in Multimedia Reasoning. Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-54066-5. ISBN 978-3-319-54066-5. S2CID 3180114. Archived from the original on 29 August 2017. Ontology: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 320–328 Smoliar, Stephen W.; Zhang, HongJiang (1994). "Content based video indexing and retrieval". IEEE Multimedia. 1 (2): 62–72. doi:10.1109/93.311653. S2CID 32710913. Neumann, Bernd; Möller, Ralf (January 2008). "On scene interpretation with description logics". Image and Vision Computing. 26 (1): 82–101. doi:10.1016/j.imavis.2007.08.013. Kuperman, G. J.; Reichley, R. M.; Bailey, T. C. (1 July 2006). "Using Commercial Knowledge Bases for Clinical Decision Support: Opportunities, Hurdles, and Recommendations". Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 13 (4): 369–371. doi:10.1197/jamia.M2055. PMC 1513681. PMID 16622160. MCGARRY, KEN (1 December 2005). "A survey of interestingness measures for knowledge discovery". The Knowledge Engineering Review. 20 (1): 39–61. doi:10.1017/S0269888905000408. S2CID 14987656. Bertini, M; Del Bimbo, A; Torniai, C (2006). "Automatic annotation and semantic retrieval of video sequences using multimedia ontologies". MM '06 Proceedings of the 14th ACM international conference on Multimedia. 14th ACM international conference on Multimedia. Santa Barbara: ACM. pp. 679–682. Qualification problem: * McCarthy & Hayes 1969 * Russell & Norvig 2003[page needed] While McCarthy was primarily concerned with issues in the logical representation of actions, Russell & Norvig 2003 apply the term to the more general issue of default reasoning in the vast network of assumptions underlying all our commonsense knowledge. Default reasoning and default logic, non-monotonic logics, circumscription, closed world assumption, abduction (Poole et al. places abduction under "default reasoning". Luger et al. places this under "uncertain reasoning"): * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 354–360, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 248–256, 323–335, * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 335–363, * Nilsson 1998, ~18.3.3 Breadth of commonsense knowledge: * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 21, * Crevier 1993, pp. 113–114, * Moravec 1988, p. 13, * Lenat & Guha 1989 (Introduction) Dreyfus & Dreyfus 1986. Gladwell 2005. Expert knowledge as embodied intuition: * Dreyfus & Dreyfus 1986 (Hubert Dreyfus is a philosopher and critic of AI who was among the first to argue that most useful human knowledge was encoded sub-symbolically. See Dreyfus' critique of AI) * Gladwell 2005 (Gladwell's Blink is a popular introduction to sub-symbolic reasoning and knowledge.) * Hawkins & Blakeslee 2005 (Hawkins argues that sub-symbolic knowledge should be the primary focus of AI research.) Planning: * ACM 1998, ~I.2.8, * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 375–459, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 281–316, * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 314–329, * Nilsson 1998, chpt. 10.1–2, 22 Information value theory: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 600–604 Classical planning: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 375–430, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 281–315, * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 314–329, * Nilsson 1998, chpt. 10.1–2, 22 Planning and acting in non-deterministic domains: conditional planning, execution monitoring, replanning and continuous planning: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 430–449 Multi-agent planning and emergent behavior: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 449–455 Turing 1950. Solomonoff 1956. Alan Turing discussed the centrality of learning as early as 1950, in his classic paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence".[120] In 1956, at the original Dartmouth AI summer conference, Ray Solomonoff wrote a report on unsupervised probabilistic machine learning: "An Inductive Inference Machine".[121] This is a form of Tom Mitchell's widely quoted definition of machine learning: "A computer program is set to learn from an experience E with respect to some task T and some performance measure P if its performance on T as measured by P improves with experience E." Learning: * ACM 1998, I.2.6, * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 649–788, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 397–438, * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 385–542, * Nilsson 1998, chpt. 3.3, 10.3, 17.5, 20 Jordan, M. I.; Mitchell, T. M. (16 July 2015). "Machine learning: Trends, perspectives, and prospects". Science. 349 (6245): 255–260. Bibcode:2015Sci...349..255J. doi:10.1126/science.aaa8415. PMID 26185243. S2CID 677218. Reinforcement learning: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 763–788 * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 442–449 Natural language processing: * ACM 1998, I.2.7 * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 790–831 * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 91–104 * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 591–632 "Versatile question answering systems: seeing in synthesis" Archived 1 February 2016 at the Wayback Machine, Mittal et al., IJIIDS, 5(2), 119–142, 2011 Applications of natural language processing, including information retrieval (i.e. text mining) and machine translation: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 840–857, * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 623–630 Cambria, Erik; White, Bebo (May 2014). "Jumping NLP Curves: A Review of Natural Language Processing Research [Review Article]". IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine. 9 (2): 48–57. doi:10.1109/MCI.2014.2307227. S2CID 206451986. Vincent, James (7 November 2019). "OpenAI has published the text-generating AI it said was too dangerous to share". The Verge. Archived from the original on 11 June 2020. Retrieved 11 June 2020. Machine perception: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 537–581, 863–898 * Nilsson 1998, ~chpt. 6 Speech recognition: * ACM 1998, ~I.2.7 * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 568–578 Object recognition: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 885–892 Computer vision: * ACM 1998, I.2.10 * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 863–898 * Nilsson 1998, chpt. 6 Robotics: * ACM 1998, I.2.9, * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 901–942, * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 443–460 Moving and configuration space: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 916–932 Tecuci 2012. Robotic mapping (localization, etc): * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 908–915 Cadena, Cesar; Carlone, Luca; Carrillo, Henry; Latif, Yasir; Scaramuzza, Davide; Neira, Jose; Reid, Ian; Leonard, John J. (December 2016). "Past, Present, and Future of Simultaneous Localization and Mapping: Toward the Robust-Perception Age". IEEE Transactions on Robotics. 32 (6): 1309–1332. arXiv:1606.05830. Bibcode:2016arXiv160605830C. doi:10.1109/TRO.2016.2624754. S2CID 2596787. Moravec, Hans (1988). Mind Children. Harvard University Press. p. 15. Chan, Szu Ping (15 November 2015). "This is what will happen when robots take over the world". Archived from the original on 24 April 2018. Retrieved 23 April 2018. "IKEA furniture and the limits of AI". The Economist. 2018. Archived from the original on 24 April 2018. Retrieved 24 April 2018. Kismet. Thompson, Derek (2018). "What Jobs Will the Robots Take?". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 24 April 2018. Retrieved 24 April 2018. Scassellati, Brian (2002). "Theory of mind for a humanoid robot". Autonomous Robots. 12 (1): 13–24. doi:10.1023/A:1013298507114. S2CID 1979315. Cao, Yongcan; Yu, Wenwu; Ren, Wei; Chen, Guanrong (February 2013). "An Overview of Recent Progress in the Study of Distributed Multi-Agent Coordination". IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics. 9 (1): 427–438. arXiv:1207.3231. doi:10.1109/TII.2012.2219061. S2CID 9588126. Thro 1993. Edelson 1991. Tao & Tan 2005. Poria, Soujanya; Cambria, Erik; Bajpai, Rajiv; Hussain, Amir (September 2017). "A review of affective computing: From unimodal analysis to multimodal fusion". Information Fusion. 37: 98–125. doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2017.02.003. hdl:1893/25490. Emotion and affective computing: * Minsky 2006 Waddell, Kaveh (2018). "Chatbots Have Entered the Uncanny Valley". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 24 April 2018. Retrieved 24 April 2018. Pennachin, C.; Goertzel, B. (2007). Contemporary Approaches to Artificial General Intelligence. Artificial General Intelligence. Cognitive Technologies. Cognitive Technologies. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-68677-4_1. ISBN 978-3-540-23733-4. Roberts, Jacob (2016). "Thinking Machines: The Search for Artificial Intelligence". Distillations. Vol. 2 no. 2. pp. 14–23. Archived from the original on 19 August 2018. Retrieved 20 March 2018. "The superhero of artificial intelligence: can this genius keep it in check?". the Guardian. 16 February 2016. Archived from the original on 23 April 2018. Retrieved 26 April 2018. Mnih, Volodymyr; Kavukcuoglu, Koray; Silver, David; Rusu, Andrei A.; Veness, Joel; Bellemare, Marc G.; Graves, Alex; Riedmiller, Martin; Fidjeland, Andreas K.; Ostrovski, Georg; Petersen, Stig; Beattie, Charles; Sadik, Amir; Antonoglou, Ioannis; King, Helen; Kumaran, Dharshan; Wierstra, Daan; Legg, Shane; Hassabis, Demis (26 February 2015). "Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning". Nature. 518 (7540): 529–533. Bibcode:2015Natur.518..529M. doi:10.1038/nature14236. PMID 25719670. S2CID 205242740. Sample, Ian (14 March 2017). "Google's DeepMind makes AI program that can learn like a human". the Guardian. Archived from the original on 26 April 2018. Retrieved 26 April 2018. "From not working to neural networking". The Economist. 2016. Archived from the original on 31 December 2016. Retrieved 26 April 2018. Domingos 2015. Artificial brain arguments: AI requires a simulation of the operation of the human brain * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 957 * Crevier 1993, pp. 271 and 279 A few of the people who make some form of the argument: * Moravec 1988 * Kurzweil 2005, p. 262 * Hawkins & Blakeslee 2005 The most extreme form of this argument (the brain replacement scenario) was put forward by Clark Glymour in the mid-1970s and was touched on by Zenon Pylyshyn and John Searle in 1980. Goertzel, Ben; Lian, Ruiting; Arel, Itamar; de Garis, Hugo; Chen, Shuo (December 2010). "A world survey of artificial brain projects, Part II: Biologically inspired cognitive architectures". Neurocomputing. 74 (1–3): 30–49. doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2010.08.012. Nilsson 1983, p. 10. Nils Nilsson writes: "Simply put, there is wide disagreement in the field about what AI is all about."[163] AI's immediate precursors: * McCorduck 2004, pp. 51–107 * Crevier 1993, pp. 27–32 * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 15, 940 * Moravec 1988, p. 3 Haugeland 1985, pp. 112–117 The most dramatic case of sub-symbolic AI being pushed into the background was the devastating critique of perceptrons by Marvin Minsky and Seymour Papert in 1969. See History of AI, AI winter, or Frank Rosenblatt. Cognitive simulation, Newell and Simon, AI at CMU (then called Carnegie Tech): * McCorduck 2004, pp. 139–179, 245–250, 322–323 (EPAM) * Crevier 1993, pp. 145–149 Soar (history): * McCorduck 2004, pp. 450–451 * Crevier 1993, pp. 258–263 McCarthy and AI research at SAIL and SRI International: * McCorduck 2004, pp. 251–259 * Crevier 1993 AI research at Edinburgh and in France, birth of Prolog: * Crevier 1993, pp. 193–196 * Howe 1994 AI at MIT under Marvin Minsky in the 1960s : * McCorduck 2004, pp. 259–305 * Crevier 1993, pp. 83–102, 163–176 * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 19 Cyc: * McCorduck 2004, p. 489, who calls it "a determinedly scruffy enterprise" * Crevier 1993, pp. 239–243 * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 363−365 * Lenat & Guha 1989 Knowledge revolution: * McCorduck 2004, pp. 266–276, 298–300, 314, 421 * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 22–23 Frederick, Hayes-Roth; William, Murray; Leonard, Adelman. "Expert systems". AccessScience. doi:10.1036/1097-8542.248550. Embodied approaches to AI: * McCorduck 2004, pp. 454–462 * Brooks 1990 * Moravec 1988 Weng et al. 2001. Lungarella et al. 2003. Asada et al. 2009. Oudeyer 2010. Revival of connectionism: * Crevier 1993, pp. 214–215 * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 25 Computational intelligence * IEEE Computational Intelligence Society Archived 9 May 2008 at the Wayback Machine Hutson, Matthew (16 February 2018). "Artificial intelligence faces reproducibility crisis". Science. pp. 725–726. Bibcode:2018Sci...359..725H. doi:10.1126/science.359.6377.725. Archived from the original on 29 April 2018. Retrieved 28 April 2018. Norvig 2012. Langley 2011. Katz 2012. The intelligent agent paradigm: * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 27, 32–58, 968–972 * Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998, pp. 7–21 * Luger & Stubblefield 2004, pp. 235–240 * Hutter 2005, pp. 125–126 The definition used in this article, in terms of goals, actions, perception and environment, is due to Russell & Norvig (2003). Other definitions also include knowledge and learning as additional criteria. Agent architectures, hybrid intelligent systems: * Russell & Norvig (2003, pp. 27, 932, 970–972) * Nilsson (1998, chpt. 25) Hierarchical control system: * Albus 2002 Lieto, Antonio; Lebiere, Christian; Oltramari, Alessandro (May 2018). "The knowledge level in cognitive architectures: Current limitations and possibile developments". Cognitive Systems Research. 48: 39–55. doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2017.05.001. hdl:2318/1665207. S2CID 206868967. Lieto, Antonio; Bhatt, Mehul; Oltramari, Alessandro; Vernon, David (May 2018). "The role of cognitive architectures in general artificial intelligence". Cognitive Systems Research. 48: 1–3. doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2017.08.003. hdl:2318/1665249. S2CID 36189683. Russell & Norvig 2009, p. 1. White Paper: On Artificial Intelligence - A European approach to excellence and trust (PDF). Brussels: European Commission. 2020. p. 1. Archived (PDF) from the original on 20 February 2020. Retrieved 20 February 2020. CNN 2006. Using AI to predict flight delays Archived 20 November 2018 at the Wayback Machine, Ishti.org. N. Aletras; D. Tsarapatsanis; D. Preotiuc-Pietro; V. Lampos (2016). "Predicting judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: a Natural Language Processing perspective". PeerJ Computer Science. 2: e93. doi:10.7717/peerj-cs.93. "The Economist Explains: Why firms are piling into artificial intelligence". The Economist. 31 March 2016. Archived from the original on 8 May 2016. Retrieved 19 May 2016. Lohr, Steve (28 February 2016). "The Promise of Artificial Intelligence Unfolds in Small Steps". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 29 February 2016. Retrieved 29 February 2016. Frangoul, Anmar (14 June 2019). "A Californian business is using A.I. to change the way we think about energy storage". CNBC. Archived from the original on 25 July 2020. Retrieved 5 November 2019. Wakefield, Jane (15 June 2016). "Social media 'outstrips TV' as news source for young people". BBC News. Archived from the original on 24 June 2016. Smith, Mark (22 July 2016). "So you think you chose to read this article?". BBC News. Archived from the original on 25 July 2016. Brown, Eileen. "Half of Americans do not believe deepfake news could target them online". ZDNet. Archived from the original on 6 November 2019. Retrieved 3 December 2019. The Turing test: Turing's original publication: * Turing 1950 Historical influence and philosophical implications: * Haugeland 1985, pp. 6–9 * Crevier 1993, p. 24 * McCorduck 2004, pp. 70–71 * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 2–3 and 948 Dartmouth proposal: * McCarthy et al. 1955 (the original proposal) * Crevier 1993, p. 49 (historical significance) The physical symbol systems hypothesis: * Newell & Simon 1976, p. 116 * McCorduck 2004, p. 153 * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 18 Dreyfus 1992, p. 156. Dreyfus criticized the necessary condition of the physical symbol system hypothesis, which he called the "psychological assumption": "The mind can be viewed as a device operating on bits of information according to formal rules."[206] Dreyfus' critique of artificial intelligence: * Dreyfus 1972, Dreyfus & Dreyfus 1986 * Crevier 1993, pp. 120–132 * McCorduck 2004, pp. 211–239 * Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 950–952, Gödel 1951: in this lecture, Kurt Gödel uses the incompleteness theorem to arrive at the following disjunction: (a) the human mind is not a consistent finite machine, or (b) there exist Diophantine equations for which it cannot decide whether solutions exist. Gödel finds (b) implausible, and thus seems to have believed the human mind was not equivalent to a finite machine, i.e., its power exceeded that of any finite machine. He recognized that this was only a conjecture, since one could never disprove (b). Yet he considered the disjunctive conclusion to be a "certain fact". The Mathematical Objection: * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 949 * McCorduck 2004, pp. 448–449 Making the Mathematical Objection: * Lucas 1961 * Penrose 1989 Refuting Mathematical Objection: * Turing 1950 under "(2) The Mathematical Objection" * Hofstadter 1979 Background: * Gödel 1931, Church 1936, Kleene 1935, Turing 1937 Graham Oppy (20 January 2015). "Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Archived from the original on 22 April 2016. Retrieved 27 April 2016. These Gödelian anti-mechanist arguments are, however, problematic, and there is wide consensus that they fail. Stuart J. Russell; Peter Norvig (2010). "26.1.2: Philosophical Foundations/Weak AI: Can Machines Act Intelligently?/The mathematical objection". Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0-13-604259-4. even if we grant that computers have limitations on what they can prove, there is no evidence that humans are immune from those limitations. Mark Colyvan. An introduction to the philosophy of mathematics. Cambridge University Press, 2012. From 2.2.2, 'Philosophical significance of Gödel's incompleteness results': "The accepted wisdom (with which I concur) is that the Lucas-Penrose arguments fail." Iphofen, Ron; Kritikos, Mihalis (3 January 2019). "Regulating artificial intelligence and robotics: ethics by design in a digital society". Contemporary Social Science: 1–15. doi:10.1080/21582041.2018.1563803. ISSN 2158-2041. "Ethical AI Learns Human Rights Framework". Voice of America. Archived from the original on 11 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019. Crevier 1993, pp. 132–144. In the early 1970s, Kenneth Colby presented a version of Weizenbaum's ELIZA known as DOCTOR which he promoted as a serious therapeutic tool.[216] Joseph Weizenbaum's critique of AI: * Weizenbaum 1976 * Crevier 1993, pp. 132–144 * McCorduck 2004, pp. 356–373 * Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 961 Weizenbaum (the AI researcher who developed the first chatterbot program, ELIZA) argued in 1976 that the misuse of artificial intelligence has the potential to devalue human life. Wendell Wallach (2010). Moral Machines, Oxford University Press. Wallach, pp 37–54. Wallach, pp 55–73. Wallach, Introduction chapter. Michael Anderson and Susan Leigh Anderson (2011), Machine Ethics, Cambridge University Press. "Machine Ethics". aaai.org. Archived from the original on 29 November 2014. Rubin, Charles (Spring 2003). "Artificial Intelligence and Human Nature". The New Atlantis. 1: 88–100. Archived from the original on 11 June 2012. Brooks, Rodney (10 November 2014). "artificial intelligence is a tool, not a threat". Archived from the original on 12 November 2014. "Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, and Bill Gates Warn About Artificial Intelligence". Observer. 19 August 2015. Archived from the original on 30 October 2015. Retrieved 30 October 2015. Chalmers, David (1995). "Facing up to the problem of consciousness". Journal of Consciousness Studies. 2 (3): 200–219. Archived from the original on 8 March 2005. Retrieved 11 October 2018. See also this link Archived 8 April 2011 at the Wayback Machine Horst, Steven, (2005) "The Computational Theory of Mind" Archived 11 September 2018 at the Wayback Machine in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Searle 1980, p. 1. This version is from Searle (1999), and is also quoted in Dennett 1991, p. 435. Searle's original formulation was "The appropriately programmed computer really is a mind, in the sense that computers given the right programs can be literally said to understand and have other cognitive states." [230] Strong AI is defined similarly by Russell & Norvig (2003, p. 947): "The assertion that machines could possibly act intelligently

Deep learning final year projects offer students the opportunity to explore the latest advancements in artificial intelligence and apply them to real-world problems. One project idea is developing a Deep Learning-Based Image Classification System, which uses convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to classify images into different categories.

The project that we worked on this summer internship falls in the domain of research in IoT (Internet of Things). Initially, the mentor asked us to find real-life problems, which we would attempt to solve by using the tools of Information Technology. We were allowed to discuss and work in a group of three. We picked the problem of devising an attendance monitoring system, which would mark the presence of the students in a big room, in a non-intrusive manner using image recognition, for e.g. an auditorium or our college’s lecture theatre. Our project was divided into two phases, which would be illustrated in the subsequent passages. The first phase involved doing a literature survey on the tools and technologies through various authentic research papers and the existing libraries, which would enable us to devise a backend structure for our project. We, then developed a flowchart, which comprised of two modules of processes, through which the procedure would pass through. The first module involves the initial training of a machine learning based classifier by training it with the various images of a specific person. The second module involves the testing part in the real environment, which involves face detection and face recognition. A camera would take the frames/image of a live audience. Then, these frames would be pre-processed (involves grey-scaling and image resizing) for achieving better performance in the subsequent face detection module. The face-detection algorithm would detect all the faces present in the frame, and would crop the detected faces, and would pass them to the face recognition classifier for testing. The classifier would classify the cropped images and would mark the attendance accordingly. The libraries used for face-detection were that of OpenCV, and a convolutional neural network was trained for the image recognition part. The libraries which were used for training the convolutional neural network was Keras. The second phase involved the implementation part, where we had to gather the data for training the neural network, and find out the parameters of the image, for which we are getting better accuracy performance. We trained the neural network with the images of about 64 students, with about 20 images per student, covering different angles and brightness levels. We trained the network with 70 percent of the image corpus, and used the remaining 30 percent for testing. We got an accuracy of 93 percent. For testing the face detection part, we took a video of a classroom of about 40 students. Then, we generated frames from the video and passed it to the face detection algorithm. We extrapolated that the accuracy of an individual frame was not that high, but if we consider all the detected members in all the frames, we are covering almost every student. Hence, considering multiple frames for testing is crucial to get a high detection accuracy. We are currently trying to figure out the camera and its mounting position, which would be conducive for the algorithm, to give us accurate results.

Human locomotion affects our daily living activities. Losing limbs or having neurological disorders with motor deficits could affect the quality of life. Gait analysis is a systematic study of human locomotion, which is defined as body movements through aerial, aquatic, or terrestrial space. This analysis has been used to study people ambulation, registration, and reconstruction of physical location and orientation of individual limbs used to quantify and characterize human locomotion using different gait parameters including gait activities such as walking, stairs ascending/descending, … etc., phases, and spatiotemporal parameters of human gait. Additionally, gait analysis parameters can be used to evaluate the functionality of patients and wearable system users. The evaluation is based on patient's stability, energy consumption, gait symmetry, ability to recover from perturbations, and ability to perform activities of daily living. Many companies develop assistive, wearable, and rehabilitation devices for patients with lower limb neurological disorders. These devices are tested and evaluated inside controlled lab environments. However, they don’t have enough data on the patient's performance in real world and harsh environments. Collecting large datasets of device users and their gait performance data in real environment are notoriously difficult. Additionally, collecting data on less prevalent or on gait activities other than level walking, stair ascending/descending, sitting, standing, …etc. on hard surfaces is rarely attempted. However, the scope for collecting gait data from alternative sources other than traditional gait labs could be attained with the help of IoT data collection embedded on the wearable and assistive devices and well-established cloud platforms equipped with big-data analytics and data visualization capabilities. This project aims to develop a cloud platform capable of collect data from wearable and assistive devices such as prostheses, exoskeleton, gait analysis wearable sensors, …etc. using IoT technologies. This platform is capable of automatically use data mining and visualization tools. Additionally, it uses statistical and machine learning techniques to estimate gait events, gait symmetry, gait speed, gait activities, stability, energy consumption, …etc. Also, it is capable of predicting patient's progress over time. The project will be composed of two major components, hardware component and software component. In hardware component, the students will design and implement the IoT that collects the different readings for gait analysis and send them to the cloud. Meanwhile, in the software component, the students will design and implement a set of algorithms to visualize the collected data, then design and implement data analytics to automatically analyze the collected data, so that we can estimate gait events, gait symmetry, gait speed, classify gait activities, stability, energy consumption, …etc. and predicting patient's progress over time. By analyzing the collected data, the patient's progress can be predicted over time. Additionally, these data can be used through manufacturers of prostheses legs to improve their products, as well as through health-care centers to assess the patient's performance. The following figures describe the main modules of our graduation project.

A simple Data science project on Predicting Student's dropout using Machine Learning classification models

Authentication is a significant issue in system control in computer-based communication. Human face recognition is an important branch of biometric verification and has been widely used in many applications, such as video monitor system, human-computer interaction, and door control system and network security. This project describes a method for Student’s Attendance System which will integrate with the face recognition technology using deep learning algorithms. The system will recognize the students present in the classroom and provide the list of present students for the lecture. The primary technique used for the face detection is by using python inbuilt packages of OpenCV. Once the model is trained on different kinds of datasets, the project will help in identifying students present for the class. The front end will be based on an android application. The application uses SQLite database for establishing connection between web app and the model. The backend model mainly comprises of a convolutional neural network which extracts features and trains the model in recognizing those features. The inbuilt OpenCV uses haarcascade classifiers in identifying the faces present in the input image. The list of identified will be displayed as the end result.

This part include the my minor project of classifying the growth of the student based on their academic performance by using the naive bayes algorithm in machine learning

This is a simple machine learning project using classifiers for predicting factors which affect student grades, using data from CSV file.

*****PROJECT SPECIFICATION: Machine Learning Capstone Analysis Project***** This capstone project involves machine learning modeling and analysis of clinical, demographic, and brain related derived anatomic measures from human MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) tests (http://www.oasis-brains.org/). The objectives of these measurements are to diagnose the level of Dementia in the individuals and the probability that these individuals may have Alzheimer's Disease (AD). In published studies, Machine Learning has been applied to Alzheimer’s/Dementia identification from MRI scans and related data in the academic papers/theses in References 10 and 11 listed in the References Section below. Recently, a close relative of mine had to undergo a sequence of MRI tests for cognition difficulties.The motivation for choosing this topic for the Capstone project arose from the desire to understand and analyze potential for Dementia and AD from MRI related data. Cognitive testing, clinical assessments and demographic data related to these MRI tests are used in this project. This Capstone project does not use the MRI "imaging" data and does not focus on AD, focusses only on Dementia. *****Conclusions, Justification, and Reflections***** [Student adequately summarizes the end-to-end problem solution and discusses one or two particular aspects of the project they found interesting or difficult.] The formulation of OASIS data (Ref 1 and 2) in terms of a dementia classification problem based on demographic and clinical data only (and without directly using the MRI image data), is a simplification that has major advantages and appeal. This means the trained model can classify whether an individual has dementia or not with about 87% accuracy, without having to wait for radiological interpretation of MRI scans. This can provide an early alert for intervention and initiation of treatment for those with onset of dementia. The assumption that the combined cross-sectional and longitudinal datasets would lead to dementia label classification of acceptable accuracy came out to be true. The method required careful data cleaning and data preparation work, converting it to a binary classification problem, as outlined in this notebook. At the outset it was not clear which algorithm(s) would be more appropriate for the binary and multi-label classification problem. The approach of spot checking the algorithms early for accuracy led to the determination of a smaller set of algorithms with higher accuracy (e.g. Gadient Boosting and Random Forest) for a deeper dive examination, e.g. use of a k-fold cross-validation approach in classifying the CDR label. The neural network benchmark model accuracy of 78% for binary classification was exceeded by the classification accuracy of the main output of this study, the trained Gradient Boosting and Random Forest classification models. This builds confidence in the latter model for further training with new data and further classification use for new patients.

Sentiment analysis of student feedback in engineering education. The goal is to analyze and gain insights from student feedback data to understand their sentiments and identify areas for improvement. The sentiment analysis is performed using natural language processing techniques and machine learning algorithms to classify feedback data.

While handwriting provides an efficient means to write mathematical symbols quickly, it is a poor medium for rapid exchange and editing of documents. Meanwhile, advanced typesetting systems like LaTeX and MathML have provided an environment where mathematical symbols can be typeset with precision, but at the cost of typing time and a steep learning curve. In order to facilitate the exchange, preservation and ease of editing of mathematical documents, we propose a method of offline handwritten equational recognition. Our system takes a handwritten document, for example a students calculus homework, then partitions, classifies and parses the document into LaTeX.

BDP 05: CLUSTERING OF LARGE UNLABELED DATASETS OVERVIEW Real world data is frequently unlabeled and can seem completely random. In these sort of situations, unsupervised learning techniques are a great way to find underlying patterns. This project looks at one such algorithm, KMeans clustering, which searches for boundaries separating groups of points based on their differences in some features. The goal of the project is to implement an unsupervised clustering algorithm using a distributed computing platform. You will implement this algorithm on the stack overflow user base to find different ways the community can be divided, and investigate what causes these groupings. The clustering algorithm must be designed in a way that is appropriate for data intensive parallel computing frameworks. Spark would be the primary choice for this project, but it could also be implemented in Hadoop MapReduce. Algorithm implementations from external libraries such as Spark MLib may not be utilised; the code must be original from the students. However, once the algorithm is completed, a comparison between your own results and that generated by MLlib could be interesting and aid your investigation. Stack Overflow is the main dataset for this project, but alternative datasets can be adopted after consultation with the module organiser. Additionally, different clustering algorithms may be utilised, but this must be discussed and approved y the module organiser. DATASET The project will use the Stack Overflow dataset. This dataset is located in HDFS at /data/stackoverflow The dataset for StackOverflow is a set of files containing Posts, Users, Votes, Comments, PostHistory and PostLinks. Each file contains one XML record per line. For complete schema information: Click here In order to define the clustering use case, you must define what should be the features of each post that will be used to cluster the data. Have a look at the different fields to define your use case. ALGORITHM The project will implement the k-means algorithm for clustering. This algorithm iteratively recomputes the location of k centroids (k is the number of clusters, defined beforehand), that aim to classify the data. Points are labelled to the closest centroid, with each iteration updating the centroids location based on all the points labelled with that value. Spark and Map/Reduce can be utilised for implementing this problem. Spark is recommended for this task, due to its performance benefits in . However, note that the MLib extension of Spark is not allowed to be used as the primary implementation. The group must code its own original implementation of the algorithm. However, it is possible to also use the mllib implementation, in order to evaluate the results from each clustering implementation. Report Contents Brief literature survey on clustering algorithms, including the challenges on implementing them at scale for parallel frameworks. The report should then justify the chosen algorithm (if changed) and the implementation. Definition of the project use case, where the implemented project will be part of the solution. Implementation in MapReduce or Spark of a clustering algorithm(KMeans). Must take into account the potential enormous size of the dataset, and develop sensible code that will scale and efficiently use additional computing nodes. The code will also need to potentially convert the dataset from its storage format to an in-memory representation. Source code should not be included in the report. However, the algorithms should be explained in the report. Results section. Adequate figures and tables should be used to present the results. The effectiveness of the algorithm should also be shown, including performance indications. Not really sure if this can be done for clustering. Critical evaluation of the results should be provided. Experiments demonstrating the technique can successfully group users in the dataset. Representation of the results, and discussion of the findings in a critical manner. ASSESSMENT The project according to the specification has a base difficulty of 85/100. This means that a perfect implementation and report would get a 85. Additional technical features and experimentation would raise the difficulty in order to opt for a full 100/100 mark. Report presentation: 20% Appropriate motivation for the work. Lack of typos/grammar errors, adequate format. Clear flow and style. Related work section including adequate referencing. Technical merit: 50% Completeness of the implementation. [25%] Provided source code. Code is documented. [10%] Design rationale of the code is provided. [10%] Efficient, and appropriate implementation for the chosen platform. [5%] Results/Analysis: 30% Experiments have been carried out on the full dataset. [10%] Adequate plots/tables are provided, with captions. [10%] Results are not only presented but discussed appropriately. [10%] Additional project goals: Implementation of additional functions beyond the base specification can raise the base mark up to 100. A non-exhaustive list of expansion ideas include: Exploration and discussion of hyperparameter tuning (e.g. the number of k groups to cluster the data into) [up to 10 marks] Comparative evaluation of clustering technique with existing implementations (e.g. mllib) [up to 10 marks] Bringing in additional datasets from stackoverflow, such as user badges, to aid in clustering [up to 5 marks] Cluster additional datasets (such as posts) [up to 10 marks] LEAD DEMONSTRATOR For specific queries related to this coursework topic, please liaise with Mr/Ms TBD, who will be the lead demonstrator for this project, as well as with the module organiser. SUBMISSION GUIDELINES The report will have a maximum length of 8 pages, not counting cover page and table of contents. The report must include motivation of the problem, brief literature survey, explanation of the selected technique, implementation details and discussion of the obtained results, and references used in the work. Additionally, the source code must be included as a separate compressed file in the submission.

Around 1 in 4 people will experience a mental health problem this year. Low-income countries have an estimated treatment gap of 85% (as compared with high-income countries with a gap of 35% to 50%). While Kenya has a mental illness prevalence rate that is comparable to that of high-income countries, there are still less than 500 healthcare professionals serving the country. In Kenya, there are growing concerns about mental health among young people, particularly university students that face a challenging and unique conflation of stressors that put them at risk of challenges like depression and substance abuse. From the use of app-based solutions for screening to electronically delivered therapies, the use of technologies including machine learning and AI will potentially transform the delivery of mental health services in the coming years. The objective of this challenge is to develop a machine learning model that classifies statements and questions expressed by university students in Kenya when speaking about the mental health challenges they struggle with. The four categories are depression, suicide, alchoholism, and drug abuse. This solution will be used for a prototype of a mental health chatbot designed specifically for university students. This initiative is a first step in leveraging technology to make mental health services more accessible and more user-friendly for young people in Kenya and around the world

The objective of this challenge is to develop a machine learning model that classifies statements and questions expressed by university students in Kenya when speaking about the mental health challenges they struggle with. The four categories are depression, suicide, alchoholism, and drug abuse.

This is a simple machine learning project using classifiers for predicting factors which affect student grades, using data from CSV file

This project is an interactive Streamlit application for analyzing student lifestyle data. It allows for exploratory data analysis (EDA) and building predictive machine learning models. Key features include predicting student CGPA through regression and classifying stress levels with a classification model.

Automatic Analysis of Music Performance Style One fundamental problem in computational music is analysis and modeling of performance style. Last year’s successful CUROP project revealed, through perceptual experiments, that players' control over rhythm is the strongest factor in the perceived quality of performance (already a publishable result). This year's project will hence investigate the computer analysis of the rhythmic component of performances in more detail, with the following aims: Implement and improve upon state-of-the-art beat detection methods. Carry out statistical analysis of rhythmic variation on a corpus of performances: Train a classifier into professional/amateur performance. Investigate to what extent rhythmic variations are controlled as opposed to random. Devise rhythmic style signatures of various performers for style recognition and retrieval. Investigate operations on rhythmic styles, e.g. apply Rachmaninoff's style to one's amateur recording. Solving the above problems is paramount to our understanding of what makes a good performance and what, quantitatively, are the differences between professional musician's styles. Applications include: musicology, teaching, automatic performance of music, high-level editing of music. This project requires integration of data mining, machine learning, and digital signal processing techniques, which are closely aligned with the expertise of the two supervisors: Dr Kirill Sidorov and Dr Andrew Jones. who are also experienced musicians. Via this project, the student will learn a variety of digital signal processing and machine learning techniques and will develop enhanced MATLAB programming skills, that are increasingly in demand for graduates. The student will work in our lab, with state-of-the-art facilities (powerful audio workstation, digital piano, audio gear). We will work collaboratively to ensure successful completion, including daily 30 minute meetings and longer weekly review meetings. The student will participate in the recently established Computational Music research sub-group. This project will contribute to longer-term development of this sub-group and foster new research avenues. Project Start/End Dates: Any 8 week period from 13th June 2016 to September 19th 2016. Contact/Supervisors: Kirill Sidorov Andrew Jones

Welcome to Classify, an innovative platform that seamlessly blends the features of a classroom management tool with the engaging elements of a social network. Designed to enhance the learning experience, Classify provides educators and students with a dynamic space to collaborate, communicate, and grow together.

This project predicts scholarship eligibility using machine learning. It analyzes student academic performance, family income, and attendance to classify whether a student is eligible or not. A classification model is trained to estimate eligibility probability and support fair, data-driven scholarship decisions.

This repository contains all the code files and output of the project carried out on the topic- Predicting Drug Abuse Behavior using Deep Learning technologies. The keywords used in the project are - drugs, BERT, Tweepy, Twitter, timeline, students, depression, bag of words, drug abuse behavior, hash, cosine similarities, LDA, multinomial naive bayes, linear support vector machine, random forest classifier, NLP, deep learning

This is a simple machine learning project using classifiers for predicting factors which affect student grades, using data from CSV file

Stress Level Prediction is a web app using machine learning to estimate user stress levels. It takes inputs like anxiety, sleep quality, and academic performance, then predicts stress using a Decision Tree Classifier. Built with Python, Flask, and scikit-learn, it's useful for students, researchers, and those interested in stress management.

Python notebook in which I developped a Machine Learning model, by going through the different steps of a Data project, for classifying crimes occuring in Chicago (based on the dataset in the following link : https://data.cityofchicago.org/Public-Safety/Crimes-2001-to-Present/ijzp-q8t2) as part of the "Projet Analyse de Données" course taught at Paris Dauphine University to last year of the IM2D bachelor's degree students

The main aim of every academia enthusiast is placement in a reputed MNC’s and even the reputation and every year admission of Institute depends upon placement that it provides to their students. So, any system that will predict the placements of the students will be a positive impact on an institute and increase strength and decreases some workload of any institute’s training and placement office (TPO). With the help of Machine Learning techniques, the knowledge can be extracted from past placed students and placement of upcoming students can be predicted. Data used for training is taken from the same institute for which the placement prediction is done. Suitable data pre-processing methods are applied along with the feature selections. Some Domain expertise is used for pre-processing as well as for outliers that grab in the dataset. We have used various Machine Learning Algorithms like Logistic, SVM, KNN, Decision Tree, Random Forest and advance techniques like Bagging, Boosting and Voting Classifier Nowadays Placement plays an important role in this world full of unemployment. Even the ranking and rating of institutes depend upon the amount of average package and amount of placement they are providing. So basically, main objective of this model is to predict whether the student might get placement or not. Different kinds of classifiers were applied i.e., Logistic Regression, SVM, Decision Tree, Random Forest, KNN, AdaBoost, Gradient Boosting and XGBoost. For this all over academics of students are taken under consideration. As placements activity take place in last year of academics so last year semesters are not taken under consideration

Machine Learning models repository by ASC-ACM_AI students of AVV_Amritapuri, this repo primarily consists of Data preprocessing of different datasets and data visualization and creating ML models using ifferent classifiers.

Introduced a machine learning–powered mental health prediction model as part of the VIO V2 architecture. This terminal-based tool evaluates student mental well-being using a trained Random Forest classifier, confidence metrics, reasoning engine, and CLI interactivity.

This repo contains all my work for Project 3 of Udacity's Machine Learning Basic Nano-degree Program. In this project, students first develop code for an image classifier built with PyTorch, then convert it into a command line application.

This repository contains an end-to-end machine learning project analyzing synthetic student mental health data. It covers data curation, exploratory analysis, feature engineering, predictive modeling, and visualization to uncover patterns in mental health indicators and build a depression-risk classifier.

The Predicting College University using Logistic Regression is a machine learning project that classifies student admission to colleges based on academic performance and extracurricular activities. It aids data-driven admission decisions, identifying key factors and predicting student outcomes accurately.