MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092579236 · doi:10.1063/5.0056425

Learn to synchronize, synchronize to learn

2021· article· en· W3092579236 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Reservoir Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsSimplicitySynchronization (alternating current)ENCODEErgodicityOutcome (game theory)SIGNAL (programming language)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the artificial intelligence community has seen a continuous interest in research aimed at investigating dynamical aspects of both training procedures and machine learning models. Of particular interest among recurrent neural networks, we have the Reservoir Computing (RC) paradigm characterized by conceptual simplicity and a fast training scheme. Yet, the guiding principles under which RC operates are only partially understood. In this work, we analyze the role played by Generalized Synchronization (GS) when training a RC to solve a generic task. In particular, we show how GS allows the reservoir to correctly encode the system generating the input signal into its dynamics. We also discuss necessary and sufficient conditions for the learning to be feasible in this approach. Moreover, we explore the role that ergodicity plays in this process, showing how its presence allows the learning outcome to apply to multiple input trajectories. Finally, we show that satisfaction of the GS can be measured by means of the mutual false nearest neighbors index, which makes effective to practitioners theoretical derivations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear ScienceSame topicNeural Networks and Reservoir ComputingFrench-language works237,207