Sequence training of multiple deep neural networks for better performance and faster training speed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, sequence level discriminative training methods have been proposed to fine-tune deep neural networks (DNN) after the framelevel cross entropy (CE) training to further improve recognition performance of DNNs. In our previous work, we have proposed a new cluster-based multiple DNNs structure and its parallel training algorithm based on the frame-level cross entropy criterion, which can significantly expedite CE training with multiple GPUs. In this paper, we extend to full sequence training for the multiple DNNs structure for better performance and meanwhile we also consider a partial parallel implementation of sequence training using multiple GPUs for faster training speed. In this work, it is shown that sequence training can be easily extended to multiple DNNs by slightly modifying error signals in output layer. Many implementation steps in sequence training of multiple DNNs can still be parallelized across multiple GPUs for better efficiency. Experiments on the Switchboard task have shown that both frame-level CE training and sequence training of multiple DNNs can lead to massive training speedup with little degradation in recognition performance. Comparing with the state-of-the-art DNN, 4-cluster multiple DNNs model with similar size can achieve more than 7 times faster in CE training and about 1.5 times faster in sequence training when using 4 GPUs.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".