EvoDNN - An Evolutionary Deep Neural Network with Heterogeneous Activation Functions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many problems in Computational Biology and Bioinformatics involve classification, such as the classification of cell samples into malignant (cancer) or benign (normal). For such tasks, we propose EvoDNN, an evolutionary deep neural network that employs an evolutionary algorithm to evolve deep heterogeneous feed-forward neural networks. While the majority of current feed-forward neural networks employ user defined homogeneous activation functions, EvoDNN creates heterogeneous multi-layer networks where each neuron's activation function is not statically defined by the user, but dynamically optimized during evolution. The main advantage offered by EvoDNN lies in that the activation functions do not need to be differentiable. This feature gives users a great degree of flexibility over which activation functions EvoDNN can utilize. This paper demonstrates how EvoDNN can simultaneously optimize each neuron's weight, bias, and activation function, and empirically shows a superior performance compared to a backpropagation-trained feed-forward neural network at the cost of additional training time. In addition, advantages of the deep architecture of EvoDNN over our earlier approach, EvoNN, which employed a single hidden layer are discussed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".