MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464909783 · doi:10.1109/tcyb.2016.2533545

Multilayered Echo State Machine: A Novel Architecture and Algorithm

2016· article· en· W2464909783 on OpenAlexaff
Zeeshan Khawar Malik, Amir Hussain, Q. M. Jonathan Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cybernetics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Reservoir Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsReservoir computingBenchmark (surveying)Echo state networkEcho (communications protocol)Computer scienceRecurrent neural networkArchitectureState (computer science)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmMachine learningArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a novel architecture and learning algorithm for a multilayered echo state machine (ML-ESM). Traditional echo state networks (ESNs) refer to a particular type of reservoir computing (RC) architecture. They constitute an effective approach to recurrent neural network (RNN) training, with the (RNN-based) reservoir generated randomly, and only the readout trained using a simple computationally efficient algorithm. ESNs have greatly facilitated the real-time application of RNN, and have been shown to outperform classical approaches in a number of benchmark tasks. In this paper, we introduce a novel criteria for integrating multiple layers of reservoirs within the ML-ESM. The addition of multiple layers of reservoirs are shown to provide a more robust alternative to conventional RC networks. We demonstrate the comparative merits of this approach in a number of applications, considering both benchmark datasets and real world applications.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations118
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CyberneticsSame topicNeural Networks and Reservoir ComputingFrench-language works237,207