Bibliographic record
Abstract
© 2012 IEEE. Dropout has been proven to be an effective algorithm for training robust deep networks because of its ability to prevent overfitting by avoiding the co-adaptation of feature detectors. Current explanations of dropout include bagging, naive Bayes, regularization, and sex in evolution. According to the activation patterns of neurons in the human brain, when faced with different situations, the firing rates of neurons are random and continuous, not binary as current dropout does. Inspired by this phenomenon, we extend the traditional binary dropout to continuous dropout. On the one hand, continuous dropout is considerably closer to the activation characteristics of neurons in the human brain than traditional binary dropout. On the other hand, we demonstrate that continuous dropout has the property of avoiding the co-adaptation of feature detectors, which suggests that we can extract more independent feature detectors for model averaging in the test stage. We introduce the proposed continuous dropout to a feedforward neural network and comprehensively compare it with binary dropout, adaptive dropout, and DropConnect on Modified National Institute of Standards and Technology, Canadian Institute for Advanced Research-10, Street View House Numbers, NORB, and ImageNet large scale visual recognition competition-12. Thorough experiments demonstrate that our method performs better in preventing the co-adaptation of feature detectors and improves test 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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".