MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105686536 · doi:10.1109/icnn.1994.374492

Training artificial neural networks using variable precision incremental communication

2002· article· en· W2105686536 on OpenAlexaff
Ali A. Ghorbani, Virendrakumar C. Bhavsar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariable (mathematics)Computer scienceArtificial neural networkScheme (mathematics)Convergence (economics)Node (physics)Feed forwardComputationDegree (music)Artificial intelligenceComputer engineeringAlgorithmMathematicsControl engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have earlier proposed incremental inter-node communication to reduce the communication cost as well as time of the learning process in artificial neural networks. In the incremental communication, instead of communicating the full magnitude of an input (output) variable of a neuron, only the increment/decrement to the previous value of the variable, using reduced precision, is sent on a communication link. In this paper, a variable precision incremental communication scheme is proposed. Variable precision, which can be implemented in either hardware or software, can further reduce the complexity of intercommunication and speed up the computations in massively parallel computers. This scheme is applied to the multilayer feedforward networks and simulation studies are carried out. The results of our simulations reveal that, regardless of the degree of the complexity of the problems used, variable precision scheme has stable convergence behavior and shows considerable degree of saving in terms of the number of bits used for communications.>

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)0.003
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.174 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207