Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 506

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 117 of the 117 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Information Theoretic Learning

Erdogmus, Deniz, Principe, Jose C.·2009·Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

Learning systems depend on three interrelated components: topologies, cost/performance functions, and learning algorithms. Topologies provide the constraints for the mapping, and the learning algorithms offer the means to find an optimal solution; but the solution is optimal with respect to what? Optimality is characterized by the criterion and in neural network literature, this is the least addressed component, yet it has a decisive influence in generalization performance. Certainly, the assumptions behind the selection of a criterion should be better understood and investigated. Traditionally, least squares has been the benchmark criterion for regression problems; considering classification as a regression problem towards estimating class posterior probabilities, least squares has been employed to train neural network and other classifier topologies to approximate correct labels. The main motivation to utilize least squares in regression simply comes from the intellectual comfort this criterion provides due to its success in traditional linear least squares regression applications – which can be reduced to solving a system of linear equations. For nonlinear regression, the assumption of Gaussianity for the measurement error combined with the maximum likelihood principle could be emphasized to promote this criterion. In nonparametric regression, least squares principle leads to the conditional expectation solution, which is intuitively appealing. Although these are good reasons to use the mean squared error as the cost, it is inherently linked to the assumptions and habits stated above. Consequently, there is information in the error signal that is not captured during the training of nonlinear adaptive systems under non-Gaussian distribution conditions when one insists on second-order statistical criteria. This argument extends to other linear-second-order techniques such as principal component analysis (PCA), linear discriminant analysis (LDA), and canonical correlation analysis (CCA). Recent work tries to generalize these techniques to nonlinear scenarios by utilizing kernel techniques or other heuristics. This begs the question: what other alternative cost functions could be used to train adaptive systems and how could we establish rigorous techniques for extending useful concepts from linear and second-order statistical techniques to nonlinear and higher-order statistical learning methodologies?

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4018/978-1-59904-849-9.ch133

Cites

117 of 117 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 117 references

Cited by

See all 506

Metadata

Authors
Erdogmus, D., & Principe, J. C.
Venue
Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence
Publisher
IGI Global
Published
2009
Pages
902-909
OpenAlex
W1624804034
Cited by
506
References
117
Type
reference entry
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Information Theoretic Learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4018/978-1-59904-849-9.ch133
The paper
Erdogmus, D., & Principe, J. C. (2009). Information Theoretic Learning. Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904-849-9.ch133

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.