MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343011127 · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2016.2518479

Pinning Impulsive Synchronization of Reaction–Diffusion Neural Networks With Time-Varying Delays

2016· article· en· W2343011127 on OpenAlexaff
Xinzhi Liu, Kexue Zhang, Wei‐Chau Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks Stability and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReaction–diffusion systemSynchronization (alternating current)Artificial neural networkControl theory (sociology)DiffusionCellular neural networkComputer scienceBoundary (topology)Topology (electrical circuits)MathematicsControl (management)Mathematical analysisPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the exponential synchronization of reaction-diffusion neural networks with time-varying delays subject to Dirichlet boundary conditions. A novel type of pinning impulsive controllers is proposed to synchronize the reaction-diffusion neural networks with time-varying delays. By applying the Lyapunov functional method, sufficient verifiable conditions are constructed for the exponential synchronization of delayed reaction-diffusion neural networks with large and small delay sizes. It is shown that synchronization can be realized by pinning impulsive control of a small portion of neurons of the network; the technique used in this paper is also applicable to reaction-diffusion networks with Neumann boundary conditions. Numerical examples are presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of the theoretical results.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations105
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning SystemsSame topicNeural Networks Stability and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207