2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.neunet.2012.02.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Approximating distributions in stochastic learning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The model uses a residual convolutional neural network that enables the direct flow of information across layers by using skip connections which can improve the performance of deep learning models . Generally, having too few layers in a neural network may lead to underfitting where the model fails to capture the complexity of the data and performs poorly on both training and testing datasets, while having too many layers can cause overfitting, where the model becomes too specific to the training data and performs poorly on testing data. , We have optimized hyperparameters including epoch numbers, batch size, the initial learning rate, weight decay, numbers of layers, size of filters, initial input image size, and sensitivity to input channels both manually and with a grid search method. Based on our empirical tests covering hundreds of conventional possible combinations of parameters, we find that ten convolutional layers, max and average pooling layers, and one flatten layer are appropriate for our task.…”
Section: Data Sources and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The model uses a residual convolutional neural network that enables the direct flow of information across layers by using skip connections which can improve the performance of deep learning models . Generally, having too few layers in a neural network may lead to underfitting where the model fails to capture the complexity of the data and performs poorly on both training and testing datasets, while having too many layers can cause overfitting, where the model becomes too specific to the training data and performs poorly on testing data. , We have optimized hyperparameters including epoch numbers, batch size, the initial learning rate, weight decay, numbers of layers, size of filters, initial input image size, and sensitivity to input channels both manually and with a grid search method. Based on our empirical tests covering hundreds of conventional possible combinations of parameters, we find that ten convolutional layers, max and average pooling layers, and one flatten layer are appropriate for our task.…”
Section: Data Sources and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…CN network models examine conditions of theory-driven, kernel-based, or sparse-random connectivity, wherein sparsity is typically around 5-10% due to the breakdown of smaller (i.e., computationally feasible) models at more brain-like sparsity. Methods for scaling up CN models include partial inference such as isolated cell-type pre-tuning 35 , multi-region network of networks models 36 , and formal (e.g., mean field or master equation) approaches to mesoscopic dynamics 37,38 . Further, CN models typically study learning rules based on Hebbian association (or similar) and the types of local plasticity mechanisms that have been the focus of experiments.…”
Section: Obstacles For Network Models With Sparse Connectivitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent literatures have shown that the STDP based learning in SNN follow an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process [28]. On the other hand, SGD follows a Feller process [29].…”
Section: B Generalizability Of Stdpmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Fokker-Planck (FP) equation tracks the resulting evolution of the SNN configurations θ over time, yielding the stationary distribution 1 z p * (θ) 1/T which follows the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process [28] ∂ ∂t…”
Section: B Generalizability Of Stdpmentioning
confidence: 99%