MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377832593 · doi:10.18280/ts.400216

A New Global Pooling Method for Deep Neural Networks: Global Average of Top-K Max-Pooling

2023· article· en· W4377832593 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

VenueTraitement du signal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoolingArtificial neural networkDeep neural networksComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global Pooling (GP) is one of the important layers in deep neural networks.GP significantly reduces the number of model parameters by summarizing the feature maps and enables a reduction in the computational cost of training.The most commonly used GP methods are global max pooling (GMP) and global average pooling (GAP).The GMP method produces successful results in experimental studies but has a tendency to overfit training data and may not generalize well to test data.On the other hand, the GAP method takes into account all activations in the pooling region, which reduces the effect of high activation areas and causes a decrease in model performance.In this study, a GP method called global average of top-k max pooling (GAMP) is proposed, which returns the average of the highest k activations in the feature map and allows for mixing the two methods mentioned.The proposed method is compared quantitatively with other GP methods using different models, i.e., Custom and VGG16-based and different datasets, i.e., CIFAR10 and CIFAR100.The experimental results show that the proposed GAMP method provides better image classification accuracy than the other GP methods.When the Custom model is used, the proposed GAMP method provides a classification accuracy of 1.29% higher on the CIFAR10 dataset and 1.72% higher on the CIFAR100 dataset compared to the method with the closest performance.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.303 · 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