↓ Skip to main content

Bioinspired Architecture Selection for Multitask Learning

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Bioinspired Architecture Selection for Multitask Learning
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fninf.2017.00039
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrés Bueno-Crespo, Rosa-María Menchón-Lara, Raquel Martínez-España, José-Luis Sancho-Gómez

Abstract

Faced with a new concept to learn, our brain does not work in isolation. It uses all previously learned knowledge. In addition, the brain is able to isolate the knowledge that does not benefit us, and to use what is actually useful. In machine learning, we do not usually benefit from the knowledge of other learned tasks. However, there is a methodology called Multitask Learning (MTL), which is based on the idea that learning a task along with other related tasks produces a transfer of information between them, what can be advantageous for learning the first one. This paper presents a new method to completely design MTL architectures, by including the selection of the most helpful subtasks for the learning of the main task, and the optimal network connections. In this sense, the proposed method realizes a complete design of the MTL schemes. The method is simple and uses the advantages of the Extreme Learning Machine to automatically design a MTL machine, eliminating those factors that hinder, or do not benefit, the learning process of the main task. This architecture is unique and it is obtained without testing/error methodologies that increase the computational complexity. The results obtained over several real problems show the good performances of the designed networks with this method.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 20%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Researcher 1 7%
Librarian 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 3 20%
Neuroscience 2 13%
Arts and Humanities 1 7%
Physics and Astronomy 1 7%
Chemistry 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 5 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 July 2017.
All research outputs
#19,913,054
of 25,342,911 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#643
of 827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,587
of 323,086 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#15
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,342,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 827 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,086 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.