Figure 1.
Case 1: Graph of the target function $ f $ with sampled data set points $ (x_n,y_n) $ marked (red on-line). The inset shows $ |\hat f| $ of its Fourier transform and the detail of its behaviour at the origin
-
Previous Article
Posterior contraction rates for non-parametric state and drift estimation
- FoDS Home
- This Issue
-
Next Article
Probabilistic learning on manifolds
September
2020, 2(3): 309-332.
doi: 10.3934/fods.2020014
Adaptive random Fourier features with Metropolis sampling
| 1. | Department of Mathematics, Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44, Stockholm, Sweden |
| 2. | H-Ai AB, Grevgatan 23,114 53, Stockholm, Sweden |
| 3. | Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA |
The supervised learning problem to determine a neural network approximation $ \mathbb{R}^d\ni x\mapsto\sum_{k = 1}^K\hat\beta_k e^{{{\mathrm{i}}}\omega_k\cdot x} $ with one hidden layer is studied as a random Fourier features algorithm. The Fourier features, i.e., the frequencies $ \omega_k\in\mathbb{R}^d $, are sampled using an adaptive Metropolis sampler. The Metropolis test accepts proposal frequencies $ \omega_k' $, having corresponding amplitudes $ \hat\beta_k' $, with the probability $ \min\big\{1, (|\hat\beta_k'|/|\hat\beta_k|)^{\gamma}\big\} $, for a certain positive parameter $ {\gamma} $, determined by minimizing the approximation error for given computational work. This adaptive, non-parametric stochastic method leads asymptotically, as $ K\to\infty $, to equidistributed amplitudes $ |\hat\beta_k| $, analogous to deterministic adaptive algorithms for differential equations. The equidistributed amplitudes are shown to asymptotically correspond to the optimal density for independent samples in random Fourier features methods. Numerical evidence is provided in order to demonstrate the approximation properties and efficiency of the proposed algorithm. The algorithm is tested both on synthetic data and a real-world high-dimensional benchmark.
Keywords:
Random Fourier features,
neural networks,
Metropolis algorithm,
stochastic gradient descent.
Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary: 65D15; Secondary: 65D40, 65C05.
Citation:
Aku Kammonen, Jonas Kiessling, Petr Plecháč, Mattias Sandberg, Anders Szepessy. Adaptive random Fourier features with Metropolis sampling. Foundations of Data Science,
2020, 2
(3)
: 309-332.
doi: 10.3934/fods.2020014
![]()
References:
| [1] |
H. Avron, M. Kapralov, C. Musco, C. Musco, A. Velingker and A. Zandieh, Random Fourier features for kernel ridge regression: Approximation bounds and statistical guarantees, in Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning (eds. D. Precup and Y. W. Teh), vol. 70 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, PMLR, International Convention Centre, Sydney, Australia, 2017,253–262, http://proceedings.mlr.press/v70/avron17a.html. Google Scholar |
| [2] |
I. Babuška and W. C. Rheinboldt,
Error estimates for adaptive finite element computations, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 15 (1978), 736-754.
doi: 10.1137/0715049. |
| [3] |
F. Bach, On the equivalence between kernel quadrature rules and random feature expansions, J. Mach. Learn. Res., 18 (2017), Paper No. 21, 38. |
| [4] |
A. R. Barron,
Universal approximation bounds for superpositions of a sigmoidal function, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, 39 (1993), 930-945.
doi: 10.1109/18.256500. |
| [5] |
W. E, C. Ma and L. Wu,
A comparative analysis of optimization and generalization properties of two-layer neural network and random feature models under gradient descent dynamics, Sci. China Math., 63 (2020), 1235-1258.
doi: 10.1007/s11425-019-1628-5. |
| [6] |
L. C. Evans, Partial Differential Equations, vol. 19 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 2nd edition, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2010.
doi: 10.1090/gsm/019. |
| [7] |
H. Haario, E. Saksman and J. Tamminen, An adaptive metropolis algorithm, Bernoulli, 7 (2001), 223–242, https://projecteuclid.org:443/euclid.bj/1080222083.
doi: 10.2307/3318737. |
| [8] |
L. K. Jones,
A simple lemma on greedy approximation in Hilbert space and convergence rates for projection pursuit regression and neural network training, Ann. Statist., 20 (1992), 608-613.
doi: 10.1214/aos/1176348546. |
| [9] |
Z. Li, J.-F. Ton, D. Oglic and D. Sejdinovic, Towards a unified analysis of random Fourier features, in ICML, 2019, arXiv: 1806.09178v4. Google Scholar |
| [10] |
A. Rahimi and B. Recht, Random features for large-scale kernel machines, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 20 (eds. J. C. Platt, D. Koller, Y. Singer and S. T. Roweis), Curran Associates, Inc., 2008, 1177–1184. Google Scholar |
| [11] |
G. O. Roberts, A. Gelman and W. R. Gilks,
Weak convergence and optimal scaling of random walk Metropolis algorithms, Ann. Appl. Probab., 7 (1997), 110-120.
doi: 10.1214/aoap/1034625254. |
| [12] |
G. O. Roberts and J. S. Rosenthal,
Optimal scaling for various Metropolis-Hastings algorithms, Statist. Sci., 16 (2001), 351-367.
doi: 10.1214/ss/1015346320. |
| [13] |
G. O. Roberts and J. S. Rosenthal, Examples of adaptive MCMC, J. Comput. Graph. Statist., 18 (2009), 349–367, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25651249.
doi: 10.1198/jcgs.2009.06134. |
| [14] |
A. Rudi and L. Rosasco, Generalization properties of learning with random features, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 (eds. I. Guyon, U. V. Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan and R. Garnett), Curran Associates, Inc., 2017, 3215–3225. Google Scholar |
| [15] |
S. Shalev-Shwartz and S. Ben-David, Understanding Machine Learning: From Theory to Algorithms, Cambridge University Press, 2014.
doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107298019.
Google Scholar
|
| [16] |
L. N. Trefethen and D. Bau III, Numerical Linear Algebra, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA, 1997.
doi: 10.1137/1.9780898719574. |
| [17] |
A. G. Wilson and R. P. Adams, Gaussian process kernels for pattern discovery and extrapolation, in ICML, 2013, arXiv: 1302.4245v3. Google Scholar |
show all references
References:
| [1] |
H. Avron, M. Kapralov, C. Musco, C. Musco, A. Velingker and A. Zandieh, Random Fourier features for kernel ridge regression: Approximation bounds and statistical guarantees, in Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning (eds. D. Precup and Y. W. Teh), vol. 70 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, PMLR, International Convention Centre, Sydney, Australia, 2017,253–262, http://proceedings.mlr.press/v70/avron17a.html. Google Scholar |
| [2] |
I. Babuška and W. C. Rheinboldt,
Error estimates for adaptive finite element computations, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 15 (1978), 736-754.
doi: 10.1137/0715049. |
| [3] |
F. Bach, On the equivalence between kernel quadrature rules and random feature expansions, J. Mach. Learn. Res., 18 (2017), Paper No. 21, 38. |
| [4] |
A. R. Barron,
Universal approximation bounds for superpositions of a sigmoidal function, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, 39 (1993), 930-945.
doi: 10.1109/18.256500. |
| [5] |
W. E, C. Ma and L. Wu,
A comparative analysis of optimization and generalization properties of two-layer neural network and random feature models under gradient descent dynamics, Sci. China Math., 63 (2020), 1235-1258.
doi: 10.1007/s11425-019-1628-5. |
| [6] |
L. C. Evans, Partial Differential Equations, vol. 19 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 2nd edition, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2010.
doi: 10.1090/gsm/019. |
| [7] |
H. Haario, E. Saksman and J. Tamminen, An adaptive metropolis algorithm, Bernoulli, 7 (2001), 223–242, https://projecteuclid.org:443/euclid.bj/1080222083.
doi: 10.2307/3318737. |
| [8] |
L. K. Jones,
A simple lemma on greedy approximation in Hilbert space and convergence rates for projection pursuit regression and neural network training, Ann. Statist., 20 (1992), 608-613.
doi: 10.1214/aos/1176348546. |
| [9] |
Z. Li, J.-F. Ton, D. Oglic and D. Sejdinovic, Towards a unified analysis of random Fourier features, in ICML, 2019, arXiv: 1806.09178v4. Google Scholar |
| [10] |
A. Rahimi and B. Recht, Random features for large-scale kernel machines, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 20 (eds. J. C. Platt, D. Koller, Y. Singer and S. T. Roweis), Curran Associates, Inc., 2008, 1177–1184. Google Scholar |
| [11] |
G. O. Roberts, A. Gelman and W. R. Gilks,
Weak convergence and optimal scaling of random walk Metropolis algorithms, Ann. Appl. Probab., 7 (1997), 110-120.
doi: 10.1214/aoap/1034625254. |
| [12] |
G. O. Roberts and J. S. Rosenthal,
Optimal scaling for various Metropolis-Hastings algorithms, Statist. Sci., 16 (2001), 351-367.
doi: 10.1214/ss/1015346320. |
| [13] |
G. O. Roberts and J. S. Rosenthal, Examples of adaptive MCMC, J. Comput. Graph. Statist., 18 (2009), 349–367, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25651249.
doi: 10.1198/jcgs.2009.06134. |
| [14] |
A. Rudi and L. Rosasco, Generalization properties of learning with random features, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 (eds. I. Guyon, U. V. Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan and R. Garnett), Curran Associates, Inc., 2017, 3215–3225. Google Scholar |
| [15] |
S. Shalev-Shwartz and S. Ben-David, Understanding Machine Learning: From Theory to Algorithms, Cambridge University Press, 2014.
doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107298019.
Google Scholar
|
| [16] |
L. N. Trefethen and D. Bau III, Numerical Linear Algebra, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA, 1997.
doi: 10.1137/1.9780898719574. |
| [17] |
A. G. Wilson and R. P. Adams, Gaussian process kernels for pattern discovery and extrapolation, in ICML, 2013, arXiv: 1302.4245v3. Google Scholar |
Figure 2.
Case 1: The same data are shown in all figures with each of the six different experiments highlighted (blue on-line)
Figure 3.
Case 2: The figure illustrates the generalization error with respect to $ K $ for a target function in dimension $ d = 5 $
Figure 4.
Case 3: The figure illustrates the generalization error over time when the approximate problem solution is computed using Algorithm 1, Algorithm 2 and stochastic gradient descent
Figure 5.
Case 4: Dependence on $ K $ of the misclassification percentage in the MNIST
Figure 6.
The generalization error as a function of the standard deviation $ \sigma_\omega $ of $ p({\omega}) $
Table 2.
Summary of numerical experiments together with their corresponding parameter choices
| Regression | |||||||
| Case | Case 1: a regularised step function | Case 2: a high dimensional function | |||||
| Purpose | Find $p$ such that the constant $\mathbb{E}_\omega[\frac{|\hat f(\omega)|^2}{(2\pi)^{d}p^2(\omega)}]$ does not become large |
Study the ability of Alg. 1 to find a high dimensional dimensional function | |||||
| Target $f(x)$ | $\text{Si}\left(\frac{x}{a}\right)e^{-\frac{x^2}{2}}$ $a = 10^{-3}$ |
$\text{Si}\left(\frac{x_1}{a}\right)e^{-\frac{|x|^2}{2}}$ $a = 10^{-1}$ |
|||||
| $d$ | $1$ | $5$ | |||||
| $K$ | $2^i, \, i = 1, 2, ..., 11$ | $2^i, \, i = 1, 2, ..., 10$ | |||||
| Experiment | Exp. 1 | Exp. 2 | Exp. 3 | Exp. 4 | Exp. 5 | Exp. 1 | Exp. 4 |
| Method | Alg. 1 | Alg. 2 | RFF$^{1}$ | SGM | Alg. 1 tabular |
Alg. 1 | SGM |
| $N$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ |
| $\tilde{N}$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ |
| $γ$ | $3d-2$ | $3d-2$ | $3d-2$ | $3d-2$ | |||
| $\lambda$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | $0$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | 0 |
| $M$ | $10^3$ | $5000$ | N/A | $10^7$ | $10^4$ | $2.5\times 10^3$ | $10^7$ |
| $\bar{M}$ | $10$ | $10$ | $10$ | $10$ | $10$ | $10$ | $10$ |
| $\delta$ | $2.4^2/d$ | $0.1$ | $2.4^2/d$ | $\frac{2.4^2}{10d}$ | |||
| $\Delta t$ | $\mathtt{1.5e-4}$ | $\mathtt{3.0e-4}$ | |||||
| $t_0$ | $M/10$ | ||||||
| $ω_{\text{max}}$ | $\infty$ | ||||||
| $m$ | $10$ | $50$ | $100$ | $25$ | |||
| Regression | Classification | ||||||
| Case | Case 3: anisotropic Gaussian function |
Case 4: The MNIST data set |
|||||
| Purpose | Computational complexity comparison |
Study the ability of Alg. 1 to work with non synthetic data | |||||
| Target $f(x)$ |
$e^{-(32 x_1)^2/2}e^{-(32^{-1} x_2)^2/2}$ | ||||||
| $d$ | $2$ | $784$ | |||||
| $K$ | $256$ | $2^i, \, i = 1, 2, ..., 13$ | |||||
| Experiment | Exp. 1 | Exp. 2 | Exp. 4 | Exp. 1 | Exp. 3 | ||
| Method | Alg. 1 | Alg. 2 | SGM | Alg. 1 | RFF$^{2}$ | ||
| $N$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $3\times 10^7$ | $6\times 10^4$ | $6 \times 10^4$ | ||
| $\tilde{N}$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | ||
| $γ$ | $3d-2$ | $3d-2$ | $3d-2$ | ||||
| $\lambda$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | $0$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | ||
| $M$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $3\times 10^7$ | $10^2$ | |||
| $\bar{M}$ | $1$ | $1$ | $1$ | $1$ | $1$ | ||
| $\delta$ | $0.5$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | ||||
| $\Delta t$ | $\mathtt{1.5e-3}$ | ||||||
| $t_0$ | $M/10$ | ||||||
| $ω_{\text{max}}$ | $\infty$ | ||||||
| $m$ | $100$ | $100$ | $M+1$ | ||||
| Regression | |||||||
| Case | Case 1: a regularised step function | Case 2: a high dimensional function | |||||
| Purpose | Find $p$ such that the constant $\mathbb{E}_\omega[\frac{|\hat f(\omega)|^2}{(2\pi)^{d}p^2(\omega)}]$ does not become large |
Study the ability of Alg. 1 to find a high dimensional dimensional function | |||||
| Target $f(x)$ | $\text{Si}\left(\frac{x}{a}\right)e^{-\frac{x^2}{2}}$ $a = 10^{-3}$ |
$\text{Si}\left(\frac{x_1}{a}\right)e^{-\frac{|x|^2}{2}}$ $a = 10^{-1}$ |
|||||
| $d$ | $1$ | $5$ | |||||
| $K$ | $2^i, \, i = 1, 2, ..., 11$ | $2^i, \, i = 1, 2, ..., 10$ | |||||
| Experiment | Exp. 1 | Exp. 2 | Exp. 3 | Exp. 4 | Exp. 5 | Exp. 1 | Exp. 4 |
| Method | Alg. 1 | Alg. 2 | RFF$^{1}$ | SGM | Alg. 1 tabular |
Alg. 1 | SGM |
| $N$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ |
| $\tilde{N}$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ |
| $γ$ | $3d-2$ | $3d-2$ | $3d-2$ | $3d-2$ | |||
| $\lambda$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | $0$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | 0 |
| $M$ | $10^3$ | $5000$ | N/A | $10^7$ | $10^4$ | $2.5\times 10^3$ | $10^7$ |
| $\bar{M}$ | $10$ | $10$ | $10$ | $10$ | $10$ | $10$ | $10$ |
| $\delta$ | $2.4^2/d$ | $0.1$ | $2.4^2/d$ | $\frac{2.4^2}{10d}$ | |||
| $\Delta t$ | $\mathtt{1.5e-4}$ | $\mathtt{3.0e-4}$ | |||||
| $t_0$ | $M/10$ | ||||||
| $ω_{\text{max}}$ | $\infty$ | ||||||
| $m$ | $10$ | $50$ | $100$ | $25$ | |||
| Regression | Classification | ||||||
| Case | Case 3: anisotropic Gaussian function |
Case 4: The MNIST data set |
|||||
| Purpose | Computational complexity comparison |
Study the ability of Alg. 1 to work with non synthetic data | |||||
| Target $f(x)$ |
$e^{-(32 x_1)^2/2}e^{-(32^{-1} x_2)^2/2}$ | ||||||
| $d$ | $2$ | $784$ | |||||
| $K$ | $256$ | $2^i, \, i = 1, 2, ..., 13$ | |||||
| Experiment | Exp. 1 | Exp. 2 | Exp. 4 | Exp. 1 | Exp. 3 | ||
| Method | Alg. 1 | Alg. 2 | SGM | Alg. 1 | RFF$^{2}$ | ||
| $N$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $3\times 10^7$ | $6\times 10^4$ | $6 \times 10^4$ | ||
| $\tilde{N}$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | ||
| $γ$ | $3d-2$ | $3d-2$ | $3d-2$ | ||||
| $\lambda$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | $0$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | ||
| $M$ | $10^4$ | $10^4$ | $3\times 10^7$ | $10^2$ | |||
| $\bar{M}$ | $1$ | $1$ | $1$ | $1$ | $1$ | ||
| $\delta$ | $0.5$ | $0.1$ | $0.1$ | ||||
| $\Delta t$ | $\mathtt{1.5e-3}$ | ||||||
| $t_0$ | $M/10$ | ||||||
| $ω_{\text{max}}$ | $\infty$ | ||||||
| $m$ | $100$ | $100$ | $M+1$ | ||||
Table 1.
Case 4: The table shows the percentage of misclassified digits in the MNIST test data set for different values of $ K $ . Comparison between adaptively computed distribution of frequencies $ \omega_k $ and sampling a fixed (normal) distribution
| K | Fixed | Fixed | Adaptive |
| 2 | 89.97% | 81.65% | 80.03% |
| 4 | 89.2% | 70.65% | 65.25% |
| 8 | 88.98% | 55.35% | 53.44% |
| 16 | 88.69% | 46.77% | 36.42% |
| 32 | 88.9% | 30.43% | 23.52% |
| 64 | 88.59% | 19.73% | 16.98% |
| 128 | 88.7% | 13.6% | 11.13% |
| 256 | 88.09% | 10.12% | 7.99% |
| 512 | 88.01% | 8.16% | 5.93% |
| 1024 | 87.34% | 6.29% | 4.57% |
| 2048 | 86.5% | 4.94% | 3.5% |
| 4096 | 85.21% | 3.76% | 2.74% |
| 8192 | 83.98% | 3.16% | 1.98% |
| K | Fixed | Fixed | Adaptive |
| 2 | 89.97% | 81.65% | 80.03% |
| 4 | 89.2% | 70.65% | 65.25% |
| 8 | 88.98% | 55.35% | 53.44% |
| 16 | 88.69% | 46.77% | 36.42% |
| 32 | 88.9% | 30.43% | 23.52% |
| 64 | 88.59% | 19.73% | 16.98% |
| 128 | 88.7% | 13.6% | 11.13% |
| 256 | 88.09% | 10.12% | 7.99% |
| 512 | 88.01% | 8.16% | 5.93% |
| 1024 | 87.34% | 6.29% | 4.57% |
| 2048 | 86.5% | 4.94% | 3.5% |
| 4096 | 85.21% | 3.76% | 2.74% |
| 8192 | 83.98% | 3.16% | 1.98% |
| [1] |
Feng Bao, Thomas Maier. Stochastic gradient descent algorithm for stochastic optimization in solving analytic continuation problems. Foundations of Data Science, 2020, 2 (1) : 1-17. doi: 10.3934/fods.2020001 |
| [2] |
Leong-Kwan Li, Sally Shao. Convergence analysis of the weighted state space search algorithm for recurrent neural networks. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2014, 4 (3) : 193-207. doi: 10.3934/naco.2014.4.193 |
| [3] |
Meiyu Sui, Yejuan Wang, Peter E. Kloeden. Pullback attractors for stochastic recurrent neural networks with discrete and distributed delays. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29 (2) : 2187-2221. doi: 10.3934/era.2020112 |
| [4] |
King Hann Lim, Hong Hui Tan, Hendra G. Harno. Approximate greatest descent in neural network optimization. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2018, 8 (3) : 327-336. doi: 10.3934/naco.2018021 |
| [5] |
Leong-Kwan Li, Sally Shao, K. F. Cedric Yiu. Nonlinear dynamical system modeling via recurrent neural networks and a weighted state space search algorithm. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2011, 7 (2) : 385-400. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2011.7.385 |
| [6] |
Stephen Coombes, Helmut Schmidt, Carlo R. Laing, Nils Svanstedt, John A. Wyller. Waves in random neural media. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2012, 32 (8) : 2951-2970. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2012.32.2951 |
| [7] |
Ying Sue Huang. Resynchronization of delayed neural networks. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2001, 7 (2) : 397-401. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2001.7.397 |
| [8] |
Ruoxia Li, Huaiqin Wu, Xiaowei Zhang, Rong Yao. Adaptive projective synchronization of memristive neural networks with time-varying delays and stochastic perturbation. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2015, 5 (4) : 827-844. doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2015.5.827 |
| [9] |
Pierre Guiraud, Etienne Tanré. Stability of synchronization under stochastic perturbations in leaky integrate and fire neural networks of finite size. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2019, 24 (9) : 5183-5201. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2019056 |
| [10] |
Quan Hai, Shutang Liu. Mean-square delay-distribution-dependent exponential synchronization of chaotic neural networks with mixed random time-varying delays and restricted disturbances. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2021, 26 (6) : 3097-3118. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020221 |
| [11] |
Yunsai Chen, Zhao Yang, Liang Ma, Peng Li, Yongjie Pang, Xin Zhao, Wenyi Yang. Efficient extraction algorithm for local fuzzy features of dynamic images. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2019, 12 (4&5) : 1311-1325. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2019090 |
| [12] |
Xianmin Geng, Shengli Zhou, Jiashan Tang, Cong Yang. A sufficient condition for classified networks to possess complex network features. Networks & Heterogeneous Media, 2012, 7 (1) : 59-69. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2012.7.59 |
| [13] |
Tatyana S. Turova. Structural phase transitions in neural networks. Mathematical Biosciences & Engineering, 2014, 11 (1) : 139-148. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2014.11.139 |
| [14] |
Delio Mugnolo, René Pröpper. Gradient systems on networks. Conference Publications, 2011, 2011 (Special) : 1078-1090. doi: 10.3934/proc.2011.2011.1078 |
| [15] |
Xiaming Chen. Kernel-based online gradient descent using distributed approach. Mathematical Foundations of Computing, 2019, 2 (1) : 1-9. doi: 10.3934/mfc.2019001 |
| [16] |
Ting Hu. Kernel-based maximum correntropy criterion with gradient descent method. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2020, 19 (8) : 4159-4177. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2020186 |
| [17] |
Shishun Li, Zhengda Huang. Guaranteed descent conjugate gradient methods with modified secant condition. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2008, 4 (4) : 739-755. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2008.4.739 |
| [18] |
Wataru Nakamura, Yasushi Narushima, Hiroshi Yabe. Nonlinear conjugate gradient methods with sufficient descent properties for unconstrained optimization. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2013, 9 (3) : 595-619. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2013.9.595 |
| [19] |
Benedict Leimkuhler, Charles Matthews, Tiffany Vlaar. Partitioned integrators for thermodynamic parameterization of neural networks. Foundations of Data Science, 2019, 1 (4) : 457-489. doi: 10.3934/fods.2019019 |
| [20] |
Leslaw Skrzypek, Yuncheng You. Feedback synchronization of FHN cellular neural networks. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2020 doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2021001 |
Impact Factor:
Tools
Metrics
Other articles
by authors
[Back to Top]