MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170184326 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2006.247076

Search Space Analysis of Recurrent Spiking and Continuous-time Neural Networks

2006· article· en· W2170184326 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe 2006 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Network Proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Recurrent neural networkStochastic neural networkArtificial neural networkInverted pendulumArtificial intelligenceConstruct (python library)Spiking neural networkOutcome (game theory)Machine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of designing recurrent continuous-time and spiking neural networks is NP-Hard. A common practice is to utilize stochastic searches, such as evolutionary algorithms, to automatically construct acceptable networks. The outcome of the stochastic search is related to its ability to navigate the search space of neural networks and discover those of high quality. In this paper we investigate the search space associated with designing the above recurrent neural networks in order to differentiate which network should be easier to automatically design via a stochastic search. Our investigation utilizes two popular dynamic systems problems; (1) the Henon map and (2) the inverted pendulum as a benchmark.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.227 · 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