MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029216481 · doi:10.1080/0952813x.2015.1020574

Mixed continuous/binary quantum-inspired learning system with non-negative least square optimisation for automated design of regularised ensemble extreme learning machines

2015· article· en· W2029216481 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Mozaffari, Nasser L. Azad, Mahdi Emami, Alireza Fathi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and ELM
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBinary numberEvolutionary algorithmExtreme learning machineEnsemble learningQuantumQuantum computerArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a hybrid quantum-inspired evolutionary algorithm (QIEA) is proposed to automatically design regularised ensemble extreme learning machines (EELMs). Quantum evolutionary computing is a relatively recent spot-lighted concept which takes advantage from both the evolutionary and quantum computing laws. In general, QIEAs have been proven to be really powerful for optimising complex engineering tasks. The fascinating trait of observation operator in QIEA enables us to transform the quantum bits to both the binary and continuous spaces. Here, the authors present a mix continuous/binary version of QIEA, to find out whether it is suited for designing regularised EELMs. Indeed, the design process of EELM is conducted at two different levels, i.e. hyper and low levels. At the low level, some novel criteria are presented in the form of penalty functions to enable the optimiser searching for parsimonious, compact and accurate regularised extreme learning machines, as individual components of the ensemble. At the hyper-level, the non-negative least square error optimisation technique is utilised to deterministically find the most eligible components for designing the ensemble. Through extensive numerical experiments, the authors demonstrate that the proposed method is really efficient for the automated design of EELM identifiers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial IntelligenceSame topicMachine Learning and ELMFrench-language works237,207