MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121472132 · doi:10.1109/tnn.2010.2046497

Realization of the Conscience Mechanism in CMOS Implementation of Winner-Takes-All Self-Organizing Neural Networks

2010· article· en· W2121472132 on OpenAlexaff
Rafał Długosz, Tomasz Talaśka, Witold Pedrycz, Ryszard Wojtyna

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkComputer scienceCMOSRealization (probability)MATLABWinner-take-allMechanism (biology)Quantization (signal processing)Electronic engineeringArtificial intelligenceControl engineeringEngineeringAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) implementation of a conscience mechanism used to improve the effectiveness of learning in the winner-takes-all (WTA) artificial neural networks (ANNs) realized at the transistor level. This mechanism makes it possible to eliminate the effect of the so-called ¿dead neurons,¿ which do not take part in the learning phase competition. These neurons usually have a detrimental effect on the network performance, increasing the quantization error. The proposed mechanism comes as part of the analog implementation of the WTA neural networks (NNs) designed for applications to ultralow power portable diagnostic devices for online analysis of ECG biomedical signals. The study presents Matlab simulations of the network's model, discusses postlayout circuit level simulations and includes results of measurement completed for the physical realization of the circuit.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations70
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Neural NetworksSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207