MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285242070 · doi:10.23952/jano.4.2022.2.05

Point-to-set distance functions for output-constrained neural networks

2022· article· en· W4285242070 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied and Numerical Optimization · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)Artificial neural networkPoint (geometry)Set pointComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceGeometryEngineeringControl engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Training a neural network for semantic segmentation with many images and pixel-level segmentations is a well-established computer-vision technique. When pixel-level segmentations are unavailable, weak supervision or prior information like bounding boxes and the size/shape of objects still enables training a network. Directly including prior knowledge on the segmentations means constraining the network output. This complicates the possible optimization strategies because the regularization then acts on the non-linear neural-network function output and not on the optimization variables. We present a new algorithm to include prior information via constraints on the network output, implemented via projection-based point-to-set distance functions, that are differentiable and always have the same functional form for the derivative. Thus, there is no need to adapt penalty functions or algorithms to various constraints. The distance function's differentiability also avoids issues related to constraining properties typically associated with non-differentiable penalties. We show that by explicitly taking a general neural network structure into account, the Lagrangian for the problem 'naturally' decouples the constraints and neural network, which allows for a gradient computation via backpropagation/adjoint-state as is common in deep learning. We present a suite of constraint sets suitable for segmentation problems. The numerical experiments show that learning from constraint sets applies to the broader imaging sciences, including visual and non-visual imagery, even when training a network for a single example.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.215 · 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