MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124581141 · doi:10.1162/089976603321780281

A Taxonomy for Spatiotemporal Connectionist Networks Revisited: The Unsupervised Case

2003· review· en· W2124581141 on OpenAlexaff
Guilherme A. Barreto, A.F.R. Araujo, Stefan C. Kremer

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Computation · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConnectionismComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceTaxonomy (biology)Generative grammarMachine learningUnsupervised learningArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spatiotemporal connectionist networks (STCNs) comprise an important class of neural models that can deal with patterns distributed in both time and space. In this article, we widen the application domain of the taxonomy for supervised STCNs recently proposed by Kremer (2001) to the unsupervised case. This is possible through a reinterpretation of the state vector as a vector of latent (hidden) variables, as proposed by Meinicke (2000). The goal of this generalized taxonomy is then to provide a nonlinear generative framework for describing unsupervised spatiotemporal networks, making it easier to compare and contrast their representational and operational characteristics. Computational properties, representational issues, and learning are also discussed, and a number of references to the relevant source publications are provided. It is argued that the proposed approach is simple and more powerful than the previous attempts from a descriptive and predictive viewpoint. We also discuss the relation of this taxonomy with automata theory and state-space modeling and suggest directions for further work.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations61
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeural ComputationSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207