skip to main content
10.1145/3308557.3308692acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

HuManIC: human machine interpretive control

Published:16 March 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Machine learning methods have made significant progress across many application areas. However, the power to utilize these methods has remained out of reach for many domain experts due to the background knowledge required to tune parameters and debug errors. Our HuManIC tool eases this requirement for relational models by 1) providing three different ways of meaningfully displaying the model and 2) by allowing the user to intuitively edit the model.

References

  1. Shuo Chang, Peng Dai, Lichan Hong, Cheng Sheng, Tianjiao Zhang, and Ed H. Chi. 2016. AppGrouper: Knowledge-graph-based Interactive Clustering Tool for Mobile App Search Results. In 21<sup>st</sup> International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Alexander Hayes, Mayukh Das, Phillip Odom, and Sriraam Natarajan. 2017. User Friendly Automatic Construction of Background Knowledge: Mode Construction from ER Diagrams. In Knowledge Capture Conference. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Luana Micallef, Iiris Sundin, Pekka Marttinen, Muhammad Ammad-ud-din, Tomi Peltola, Marta Soare, Giulio Jacucci, and Samuel Kaski. 2017. Interactive Elicitation of Knowledge on Feature Relevance Improves Predictions in Small Data Sets. In 22<sup>nd</sup> International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Sriraam Natarajan, Kristian Kersting, Tushar Khot, and Jude Shavlik. 2015. Boosted Statistical Relational Learners: From Benchmarks to Data-Driven Medicine. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Phillip Odom and Sriraam Natarajan. 2016. Actively Interacting with Experts: A Probabilistic Logic Approach. In European Conference on Machine Learning and Principles of Knowledge Discovery in Databases.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Alexander Ratner, Christopher De Sa, Sen Wu, Daniel Selsam, and Christopher Re. 2016. Data Programming: Creating Large Training Sets, Quickly. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Jaeho Shin, Sen Wu, Feiran Wang, Christopher De Sa, Ce Zhang, and Christopher Ré. 2015. Incremental Knowledge Base Construction Using DeepDive. Proc. VLDB Endow. 8 (2015), 1310--1321. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. HuManIC: human machine interpretive control

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        IUI '19 Companion: Companion Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces
        March 2019
        173 pages
        ISBN:9781450366731
        DOI:10.1145/3308557

        Copyright © 2019 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 16 March 2019

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • short-paper

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate746of2,811submissions,27%
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)8
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader