Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Deep Learning Artificial Neural Networks (NNs) of our team have revolutionised Machine Learning & AI. Many of the basic ideas behind this revolution were published within the 12 months of our "Annus Mirabilis" 1990-1991 at our lab in TU Munich. Back then, few people were interested. But a quarter century later, NNs based on our "Miraculous Year" were on over 3 billion devices, and used many billions of times per day, consuming a significant fraction of the world's compute. In particular, in 1990-91, we laid foundations of Generative AI, publishing principles of (1) Generative Adversarial Networks for Artificial Curiosity and Creativity (now used for deepfakes), (2) Transformers (the T in ChatGPT - see the 1991 Unnormalized Linear Transformer), (3) Pre-training for deep NNs (see the P in ChatGPT), (4) NN distillation (key for DeepSeek), and (5) recurrent World Models for Reinforcement Learning and Planning in partially observable environments. The year 1991 also marks the emergence of the defining features of (6) LSTM, the most cited AI paper of the 20th century (based on deep residual learning and constant error flow through residual NN connections), and (7) the most cited paper of the 21st century, based on our LSTM-inspired Highway Net that was 10 times deeper than previous feedforward NNs. As of 2025, the two most frequently cited scientific articles of all time (with the most Google Scholar citations within 3 years - manuals excluded) are both directly based on our 1991 work.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
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".