Learning Convolutional Neural Networks using Hybrid Orthogonal Projection and Estimation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have yielded the excellent performance in a variety of computer vision tasks, where CNNs typically adopt a similar structure consisting of convolution layers, pooling layers and fully connected layers. In this paper, we propose to apply a novel method, namely Hybrid Orthogonal Projection and Estimation (HOPE), to CNNs in order to introduce orthogonality into the CNN structure. The HOPE model can be viewed as a hybrid model to combine feature extraction using orthogonal linear projection with mixture models. It is an effective model to extract useful information from the original high-dimension feature vectors and meanwhile filter out irrelevant noises. In this work, we present three different ways to apply the HOPE models to CNNs, i.e., {\em HOPE-Input}, {\em single-HOPE-Block} and {\em multi-HOPE-Blocks}. For {\em HOPE-Input} CNNs, a HOPE layer is directly used right after the input to de-correlate high-dimension input feature vectors. Alternatively, in {\em single-HOPE-Block} and {\em multi-HOPE-Blocks} CNNs, we consider to use HOPE layers to replace one or more blocks in the CNNs, where one block may include several convolutional layers and one pooling layer. The experimental results on both Cifar-10 and Cifar-100 data sets have shown that the orthogonal constraints imposed by the HOPE layers can significantly improve the performance of CNNs in these image classification tasks (we have achieved one of the best performance when image augmentation has not been applied, and top 5 performance with image augmentation).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it