Training Artificial Neural Networks by Coordinate Search Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Training Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) poses a challenging and critical problem in machine learning. Despite the effectiveness of gradient-based learning methods, such as Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD), in training neural networks, they do have several limitations. For instance, they require differentiable activation functions, and cannot optimize a model based on several independent non-differentiable loss functions simultaneously; for example, the F1-score, which is used during testing, can be used during training when a gradient-free optimization algorithm is utilized. Furthermore, the training (i.e., optimization of weights) in any DNN can be possible with a small size of the training dataset. To address these concerns, we propose an efficient version of the gradient-free Coordinate Search (CS) algorithm, an instance of General Pattern Search (GPS) methods, for training (i.e., optimizing) neural networks. The proposed algorithm can be used with non-differentiable activation functions and tailored to multi-objective/multi-loss problems. Finding the optimal values for weights of ANNs is a large-scale optimization problem. Therefore instead of finding the optimal value for each variable, which is the common technique in classical CS, we accelerate optimization and convergence by bundling the variables (i.e., weights). In fact, this strategy is a form of dimension reduction for optimization problems. Based on the experimental results, the proposed method is comparable with the SGD algorithm, and in some cases, it outperforms the gradient-based approach. Particularly, in situations with insufficient labeled training data, the proposed CS method performs better. The performance plots demonstrate a high convergence rate, highlighting the capability of our suggested method to find a reasonable solution with fewer function calls. As of now, the only practical and efficient way of training ANNs with hundreds of thousands of weights is gradient-based algorithms such as SGD or Adam. In this paper we introduce an alternative method for training ANN.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".