MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099734188 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2009.5178723

Solving convex optimization problems using recurrent neural networks in finite time

2009· article· en· W2099734188 on OpenAlexaff
Long Cheng, Zeng‐Guang Hou, Noriyasu Homma, Min Tan, Madam M. Gupta

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks Stability and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkConvergence (economics)Stability (learning theory)Computer scienceExponential stabilityConvex optimizationMathematical optimizationRecurrent neural networkNonlinear systemOptimization problemStability conditionsMathematicsRegular polygonArtificial intelligenceDiscrete time and continuous timeMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recurrent neural network is proposed to deal with the convex optimization problem. By employing a specific nonlinear unit, the proposed neural network is proved to be convergent to the optimal solution in finite time, which increases the computation efficiency dramatically. Compared with most of existing stability conditions, i.e., asymptotical stability and exponential stability, the obtained finite-time stability result is more attractive, and therefore could be considered as a useful supplement to the current literature. In addition, a switching structure is suggested to further speed up the neural network convergence. Moreover, by using the penalty function method, the proposed neural network can be extended straightforwardly to solving the constrained optimization problem. Finally, the satisfactory performance of the proposed approach is illustrated by two simulation examples.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeural Networks Stability and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207