Adachi-Like Chaotic Neural Networks Requiring <i>Linear</i>-Time Computations by Enforcing a Tree-Shaped Topology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Adachi neural network (AdNN) is a fascinating neural network (NN) which has been shown to possess chaotic properties, and to also demonstrate associative memory (AM) and pattern recognition (PR) characteristics. Variants of the AdNN have also been used to obtain other PR phenomena, and even blurring. An unsurmountable problem associated with the AdNN and the variants referred to above is that all of them require a quadratic number of computations. This is essentially because the NNs in each case are completely connected graphs. In this paper, we consider how the computations can be significantly reduced by merely using a linear number of computations. To achieves this, we extract from the original completely connected graph one of its spanning trees. We then address the problem of computing the weights for this spanning tree. This is done in such a manner that the modified tree-based NN has approximately the same input-output characteristics, and thus the new weights are themselves calculated using a gradient-based algorithm. By a detailed experimental analysis, we show that the new linear-time AdNN-like network possesses chaotic and PR properties for different settings. As far as we know, such a tree-based AdNN has not been reported, and the results given here are novel.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".