MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083629661 · doi:10.1117/12.380560

<title>Adaptive structure feed-forward neural networks using polynomial activation functions</title>

2000· article· en· W2083629661 on OpenAlexaff
Liying Ma, K. Khorasani

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivation functionConstructiveArtificial neural networkComputer scienceOrthonormal basisAdaptation (eye)Sigmoid functionArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In cascade-correlation (CC) and constructive one-hidden- layer networks, structural level adaptation is achieved by incorporating new hidden units with identical activation functions one at a time into the active evolutionary net. Functional level adaptation has not received considerable attention, since selecting the activation functions will increase the search space considerably, and a systematic and a rigorous algorithm for accomplishing the search will be required as well. In this paper, we present a new strategy that is applicable to both the fixed structure as well as the constructive network trainings by using different activation functions having hierarchical degrees of nonlinearities, as the constructive learning of a one- hidden-layer feed-forward neural network (FNN) is progressing. Specifically, the orthonormal Hermite polynomials are used as the activation functions of the hidden units, which have certain interesting properties that are beneficial in network training. Simulation results for several noisy regression problems have revealed that our scheme can produce FNNs that generalize much better than one-hidden-layer constructive FNNs with identical sigmoidal activation functions, in particular as applied to rather complicated problems.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207