MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1745681373 · doi:10.1162/neco_a_00848

An Infinite Restricted Boltzmann Machine

2016· article· en· W1745681373 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Computation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRestricted Boltzmann machineBoltzmann machineLimit (mathematics)Computer scienceBoltzmann constantFunction (biology)Artificial intelligenceLayer (electronics)Energy (signal processing)Artificial neural networkAlgorithmMathematicsPattern recognition (psychology)StatisticsPhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a mathematical construction for the restricted Boltzmann machine (RBM) that does not require specifying the number of hidden units. In fact, the hidden layer size is adaptive and can grow during training. This is obtained by first extending the RBM to be sensitive to the ordering of its hidden units. Then, with a carefully chosen definition of the energy function, we show that the limit of infinitely many hidden units is well defined. As with RBM, approximate maximum likelihood training can be performed, resulting in an algorithm that naturally and adaptively adds trained hidden units during learning. We empirically study the behavior of this infinite RBM, showing that its performance is competitive to that of the RBM, while not requiring the tuning of a hidden layer size.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it