Estimating Optimal Depth of VGG Net with Tree-Structured Parzen Estimators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have shown astonishingperformances in variety of fields. However, different architecturesof the networks are required for different datasets, and findingright architecture for given data has been a topic of great interest incomputer vision communities. One of the most important factors ofthe CNNs architecture is the depth of the networks, which plays asignificant role in avoiding over-fitting. Grid Search is widely usedfor estimating the depth, but it requires huge computation time. Motivatedby this, a method for finding an optimal architecture depth isintroduced, which is based on a hyper-parameter optimizer calledTree-Structured Parzen Estimators (TPE). In this work, we showthat the TPE is capable of estimating the CNNs architecture depthwith an accuracy of 83.33% with CIFAR-10 dataset and 60.00%with CIFAR-100 dataset while it reduces the computation time bymore 70% compared to the Grid Search.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".