Generating Text with Recurrent Neural Networks
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) are very powerful sequence models that do not enjoy widespread use because it is extremely difficult to train them properly. Fortunately, recent advances in Hessian-free optimization have been able to overcome the difficulties associated with training RNNs, making it possible to apply them successfully to challenging sequence problems. In this paper we demonstrate the power of RNNs trained with the new Hessian-Free optimizer (HF) by applying them to character-level language modeling tasks. The standard RNN architecture, while effective, is not ideally suited for such tasks, so we introduce a new RNN variant that uses multiplicative (or “gated”) connections which allow the current input character to determine the transition matrix from one hidden state vector to the next. After training the multiplicative RNN with the HF optimizer for five days on 8 high-end Graphics Processing Units, we were able to surpass the performance of the best previous single method for characterlevel language modeling – a hierarchical nonparametric sequence model. To our knowledge this represents the largest recurrent neural network application to date. 1.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it