MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156581800 · doi:10.1109/icnn.1997.614125

Evolutionary artificial neural networks for competitive learning

2002· article· en· W2156581800 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew D. Brown, H.C. Card

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of International Conference on Neural Networks (ICNN'97) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsArtificial neural networkComputer scienceEncoding (memory)Artificial intelligenceFitness functionChromosomePattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)DetectorSet (abstract data type)Genetic algorithmTask (project management)Feature extractionMachine learningEngineeringBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present experiments which show that a genetic algorithm (GA) can effectively search for a set of local feature detectors, which can be used by higher neural network layers to perform an image classification task. Three different methods of encoding hidden unit weights into the GA are presented, including one which co-evolves all the feature detectors in a single chromosome, and two which promote the cooperation of feature detectors by encoding them in their own chromosome. The fitness function measures the classification percentage and confidence of the networks. The three algorithms are all capable of finding a set of feature detectors which allow for 100 percent classification performance, but a novel variant of the cooperative method produces the most consistent, highest confidence classifiers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of International Conference on Neural Networks (ICNN'97)Same topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207