MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Performance Analysis of Various Activation Functions in Artificial Neural Networks

2019· article· en· W2959400106 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jianli Feng, Shengnan Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsActivation functionArtificial neural networkComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePrincipal (computer security)Function (biology)Affect (linguistics)Machine learningPsychologyBiologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) has achieved a lot of fruitful results so far, and we know that activation function is one of the principal factors which will affect the performance of the networks. In this work, the role of many different types of activation functions, as well as their respective advantages and disadvantages and applicable fields are discussed, so people can choose the appropriate activation functions to get the superior performance of ANNs.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations192
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207