MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145836866 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2008.4564577

Reconstruction of handwritten digit images using autoencoder neural networks

2008· article· en· W2145836866 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueConference proceedings - Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoencoderRestricted Boltzmann machineArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkNumerical digitDeep learningIterative reconstructionMathematicsArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper compares the performances of three types of autoencoder neural networks, namely, the traditional autoencoder with restricted Boltzmann machine (RBM), the stacked autoencoder without RBM and the stacked autoencoder with RBM based on the efficiency for reconstruction of handwritten digit images. Experiments are performed to determine the reconstruction error in all the three cases using the same architecture configuration and training algorithm. The results show that the RBM stacked autoencoder gives better performance in terms of the reconstruction error compared to the other two architectures. We also show that all the architectures outperform PCA in terms of the reconstruction error.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.171 · 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