Ising-Dropout: A Regularization Method for Training and Compression of\n Deep Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Overfitting is a major problem in training machine learning models,\nspecifically deep neural networks. This problem may be caused by imbalanced\ndatasets and initialization of the model parameters, which conforms the model\ntoo closely to the training data and negatively affects the generalization\nperformance of the model for unseen data. The original dropout is a\nregularization technique to drop hidden units randomly during training. In this\npaper, we propose an adaptive technique to wisely drop the visible and hidden\nunits in a deep neural network using Ising energy of the network. The\npreliminary results show that the proposed approach can keep the classification\nperformance competitive to the original network while eliminating optimization\nof unnecessary network parameters in each training cycle. The dropout state of\nunits can also be applied to the trained (inference) model. This technique\ncould compress the network in terms of number of parameters up to 41.18% and\n55.86% for the classification task on the MNIST and Fashion-MNIST datasets,\nrespectively.\n
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".