MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2771070736 · doi:10.15353/vsnl.v3i1.161

Polyploidism in Deep Neural Networks: m-Parent Evolutionary Synthesis of Deep Neural Networks in Varying Population Sizes

2017· article· en· W2771070736 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Audrey G. Chung, Paul Fieguth, Alexander Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEvolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsNvidia
KeywordsMNIST databaseArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceModern evolutionary synthesisPopulationDeep neural networksComputer scienceEvolutionary algorithmEvolutionary acquisition of neural topologiesBiologyEvolutionary biologyTime delay neural networkDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evolutionary deep intelligence was recently proposed to organicallyproduce highly efficient deep neural network architecturesover successive generations. Thus far, current evolutionary synthesisprocesses are based on asexual reproduction, i.e., offspringneural networks are synthesized stochastically from a single parentnetwork. In this study, we investigate the effects of m-parentsexual evolutionary synthesis (m = 1, 2, 3, 5) in combination withvarying population sizes of three, five, and eight synthesized networksper generation. Experimental results were obtained usinga 10% subset of the MNIST handwritten digits dataset, and showthat increasing the number of parent networks results in improvedarchitectural efficiency of the synthesized networks (approximately150x synaptic efficiency and approximately 42–49x cluster efficiency)while resulting in only a 2–3% drop in testing accuracy.

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)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging SystemsSame topicEvolutionary Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207