MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124620066 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2000.859437

Input-side training in constructive neural networks based on error scaling and pruning

2000· article· en· W2124620066 on OpenAlexaff
Liying Ma, K. Khorasani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstructivePruningComputer scienceGeneralizationArtificial neural networkScalingFeedforward neural networkArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmFeed forwardPiecewiseMachine learningMathematicsProcess (computing)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents two new modifications to the input-side training in constructive one-hidden-layer feedforward neural networks (FNNs). One is based on scaling of the network output error to which output of a hidden unit is expected to maximally correlate. Results from extensive simulations of many regression problems are then summarized to demonstrate that constructive FNNs generalization capabilities may be significantly improved by the new technique. The second contribution is a proposal for a new criterion for input-side weight pruning. This pruning technique removes redundant input-side weights simultaneously with the network constructive scheme, leading to a smaller network with comparable generalization capabilities. Simulation results are provided to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed pruning technique.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations6
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207