MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3181507617

Learning Input and Recurrent Weight Matrices in Echo State Networks

2016· article· en· W3181507617 on OpenAlexaff
Hamid Palangi, Rabab Ward

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecurrent neural networkComputer scienceActivation functionRecursion (computer science)Echo state networkBackpropagationMatrix (chemical analysis)Echo (communications protocol)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmFunction (biology)Artificial neural network
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Echo State Networks (ESNs) are a special type of the temporally deep network model, the Recurrent Neural Network (RNN), where the recurrent matrix is carefully designed and both the recurrent and input matrices are fixed. An ESN uses the linearity of the activation function of the output units to simplify the learning of the output matrix. In this paper, we devise a special technique that take advantage of this linearity in the output units of an ESN, to learn the input and recurrent matrices. This has not been done in earlier ESNs due to their well known difficulty in learning those matrices. Compared to the technique of BackPropagation Through Time (BPTT) in learning general RNNs, our proposed method exploits linearity of activation function in the output units to formulate the relationships amongst the various matrices in an RNN. These relationships results in the gradient of the cost function having an analytical form and being more accurate. This would enable us to compute the gradients instead of obtaining them by recursion as in BPTT. Experimental results on phone state classification show that learning one or both the input and recurrent matrices in an ESN yields superior results compared to traditional ESNs that do not learn these matrices, especially when longer time steps are used.

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)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHermeneutics and Narrative IdentityFrench-language works237,207