MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297619716 · doi:10.1145/3546790.3546814

Think Fast: Time Control in Varying Paradigms of Spiking Neural Networks

2022· article· en· W4297619716 on OpenAlexaff
Steven C. Nesbit, Andrew O’Brien, Jocelyn Rego, Gavin Parpart, Carlos González, Garrett T. Kenyon, Edward Kim, Terrence C. Stewart, Yijing Watkins

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSpiking neural networkComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDeep learningArtificial neural networkMachine learningConstruct (python library)InferenceProcess (computing)Task (project management)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The state-of-the-art in machine learning has been achieved primarily by deep learning artificial neural networks. These networks are powerful but biologically implausible and energy intensive. In parallel, a new paradigm of neural network is being researched that can alleviate some of the computational and energy issues. These networks, spiking neural networks (SNNs), have transformative potential if the community is able to bridge the gap between deep learning and SNNs. However, SNNs are notoriously difficult to train and lack precision in their communication. In an effort to overcome these limitations and retain the benefits of the learning process in deep learning, we investigate novel ways to translate between them. We construct several network designs with varying degrees of biological plausibility. We then test our designs on an image classification task and demonstrate our designs allow for a customized tradeoff between biological plausibility, power efficiency, inference time, and accuracy.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingFrench-language works237,207