Hubbry Logo
Neural network (machine learning)Neural network (machine learning)Main
Open search
Neural network (machine learning)
Community hub
Neural network (machine learning)
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Neural network (machine learning)
Neural network (machine learning)
from Wikipedia

An artificial neural network is an interconnected group of nodes, inspired by a simplification of neurons in a brain. Here, each circular node represents an artificial neuron and an arrow represents a connection from the output of one artificial neuron to the input of another.

In machine learning, a neural network (also artificial neural network or neural net, abbreviated ANN or NN) is a computational model inspired by the structure and functions of biological neural networks.[1][2]

A neural network consists of connected units or nodes called artificial neurons, which loosely model the neurons in the brain. Artificial neuron models that mimic biological neurons more closely have also been recently investigated and shown to significantly improve performance. These are connected by edges, which model the synapses in the brain. Each artificial neuron receives signals from connected neurons, then processes them and sends a signal to other connected neurons. The "signal" is a real number, and the output of each neuron is computed by some non-linear function of the totality of its inputs, called the activation function. The strength of the signal at each connection is determined by a weight, which adjusts during the learning process.

Typically, neurons are aggregated into layers. Different layers may perform different transformations on their inputs. Signals travel from the first layer (the input layer) to the last layer (the output layer), possibly passing through multiple intermediate layers (hidden layers). A network is typically called a deep neural network if it has at least two hidden layers.[3]

Artificial neural networks are used for various tasks, including predictive modeling, adaptive control, and solving problems in artificial intelligence. They can learn from experience, and can derive conclusions from a complex and seemingly unrelated set of information.

Training

[edit]

Neural networks are typically trained through empirical risk minimization. This method is based on the idea of optimizing the network's parameters to minimize the difference, or empirical risk, between the predicted output and the actual target values in a given dataset.[4] Gradient-based methods such as backpropagation are usually used to estimate the parameters of the network.[4] During the training phase, ANNs learn from labeled training data by iteratively updating their parameters to minimize a defined loss function.[5] This method allows the network to generalize to unseen data.

Simplified example of training a neural network in object detection: The network is trained by multiple images that are known to depict starfish and sea urchins, which are correlated with "nodes" that represent visual features. The starfish match with a ringed texture and a star outline, whereas most sea urchins match with a striped texture and oval shape. However, the instance of a ring textured sea urchin creates a weakly weighted association between them.
Subsequent run of the network on an input image (left):[6] The network correctly detects the starfish. However, the weakly weighted association between ringed texture and sea urchin also confers a weak signal to the latter from one of two intermediate nodes. In addition, a shell that was not included in the training gives a weak signal for the oval shape, also resulting in a weak signal for the sea urchin output. These weak signals may result in a false positive result for sea urchin.
In reality, textures and outlines would not be represented by single nodes, but rather by associated weight patterns of multiple nodes.

History

[edit]

Early work

[edit]

Today's deep neural networks are based on early work in statistics over 200 years ago. The simplest kind of feedforward neural network (FNN) is a linear network, which consists of a single layer of output nodes with linear activation functions; the inputs are fed directly to the outputs via a series of weights. The sum of the products of the weights and the inputs is calculated at each node. The mean squared errors between these calculated outputs and the given target values are minimized by creating an adjustment to the weights. This technique has been known for over two centuries as the method of least squares or linear regression. It was used as a means of finding a good rough linear fit to a set of points by Legendre (1805) and Gauss (1795) for the prediction of planetary movement.[7][8][9][10][11]

Historically, digital computers such as the von Neumann model operate via the execution of explicit instructions with access to memory by a number of processors. Some neural networks, on the other hand, originated from efforts to model information processing in biological systems through the framework of connectionism. Unlike the von Neumann model, connectionist computing does not separate memory and processing.

Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts[12] (1943) considered a non-learning computational model for neural networks.[13] This model paved the way for research to split into two approaches. One approach focused on biological processes while the other focused on the application of neural networks to artificial intelligence.

In the late 1940s, D. O. Hebb[14] proposed a learning hypothesis based on the mechanism of neural plasticity that became known as Hebbian learning. It was used in many early neural networks, such as Rosenblatt's perceptron and the Hopfield network. Farley and Clark[15] (1954) used computational machines to simulate a Hebbian network. Other neural network computational machines were created by Rochester, Holland, Habit and Duda (1956).[16]

In 1958, psychologist Frank Rosenblatt described the perceptron, one of the first implemented artificial neural networks,[17][18][19][20] funded by the United States Office of Naval Research.[21] R. D. Joseph (1960)[22] mentions an even earlier perceptron-like device by Farley and Clark:[10] "Farley and Clark of MIT Lincoln Laboratory actually preceded Rosenblatt in the development of a perceptron-like device." However, "they dropped the subject." The perceptron raised public excitement for research in Artificial Neural Networks, causing the US government to drastically increase funding. This contributed to "the Golden Age of AI" fueled by the optimistic claims made by computer scientists regarding the ability of perceptrons to emulate human intelligence.[23]

The first perceptrons did not have adaptive hidden units. However, Joseph (1960)[22] also discussed multilayer perceptrons with an adaptive hidden layer. Rosenblatt (1962)[24]: section 16  cited and adopted these ideas, also crediting work by H. D. Block and B. W. Knight. Unfortunately, these early efforts did not lead to a working learning algorithm for hidden units, i.e., deep learning.

Deep learning breakthroughs in the 1960s and 1970s

[edit]

Fundamental research was conducted on ANNs in the 1960s and 1970s. The first working deep learning algorithm was the Group method of data handling, a method to train arbitrarily deep neural networks, published by Alexey Ivakhnenko and Lapa in the Soviet Union (1965). They regarded it as a form of polynomial regression,[25] or a generalization of Rosenblatt's perceptron.[26] A 1971 paper described a deep network with eight layers trained by this method,[27] which is based on layer by layer training through regression analysis. Superfluous hidden units are pruned using a separate validation set. Since the activation functions of the nodes are Kolmogorov-Gabor polynomials, these were also the first deep networks with multiplicative units or "gates."[10]

The first deep learning multilayer perceptron trained by stochastic gradient descent[28] was published in 1967 by Shun'ichi Amari.[29] In computer experiments conducted by Amari's student Saito, a five layer MLP with two modifiable layers learned internal representations to classify non-linearily separable pattern classes.[10] Subsequent developments in hardware and hyperparameter tunings have made end-to-end stochastic gradient descent the currently dominant training technique.

In 1969, Kunihiko Fukushima introduced the ReLU (rectified linear unit) activation function.[10][30][31] The rectifier has become the most popular activation function for deep learning.[32]

Nevertheless, research stagnated in the United States following the work of Minsky and Papert (1969),[33] who emphasized that basic perceptrons were incapable of processing the exclusive-or circuit. This insight was irrelevant for the deep networks of Ivakhnenko (1965) and Amari (1967).

In 1976 transfer learning was introduced in neural networks learning.[34][35]

Deep learning architectures for convolutional neural networks (CNNs) with convolutional layers and downsampling layers and weight replication began with the Neocognitron introduced by Kunihiko Fukushima in 1979, though not trained by backpropagation.[36][37][38]

Backpropagation

[edit]

Backpropagation is an efficient application of the chain rule derived by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in 1673[39] to networks of differentiable nodes. The terminology "back-propagating errors" was actually introduced in 1962 by Rosenblatt,[24] but he did not know how to implement this, although Henry J. Kelley had a continuous precursor of backpropagation in 1960 in the context of control theory.[40] In 1970, Seppo Linnainmaa published the modern form of backpropagation in his Master's thesis (1970).[41][42][10] G.M. Ostrovski et al. republished it in 1971.[43][44] Paul Werbos applied backpropagation to neural networks in 1982[45][46] (his 1974 PhD thesis, reprinted in a 1994 book,[47] did not yet describe the algorithm[44]). In 1986, David E. Rumelhart et al. popularised backpropagation but did not cite the original work.[48]

Convolutional neural networks

[edit]

Kunihiko Fukushima's convolutional neural network (CNN) architecture of 1979[36] also introduced max pooling,[49] a popular downsampling procedure for CNNs. CNNs have become an essential tool for computer vision.

The time delay neural network (TDNN) was introduced in 1987 by Alex Waibel to apply CNN to phoneme recognition. It used convolutions, weight sharing, and backpropagation.[50][51] In 1988, Wei Zhang applied a backpropagation-trained CNN to alphabet recognition.[52] In 1989, Yann LeCun et al. created a CNN called LeNet for recognizing handwritten ZIP codes on mail. Training required 3 days.[53] In 1990, Wei Zhang implemented a CNN on optical computing hardware.[54] In 1991, a CNN was applied to medical image object segmentation[55] and breast cancer detection in mammograms.[56] LeNet-5 (1998), a 7-level CNN by Yann LeCun et al., that classifies digits, was applied by several banks to recognize hand-written numbers on checks digitized in 32×32 pixel images.[57]

From 1988 onward,[58][59] the use of neural networks transformed the field of protein structure prediction, in particular when the first cascading networks were trained on profiles (matrices) produced by multiple sequence alignments.[60]

Recurrent neural networks

[edit]

One origin of RNN was statistical mechanics. In 1972, Shun'ichi Amari proposed to modify the weights of an Ising model by Hebbian learning rule as a model of associative memory, adding in the component of learning.[61] This was popularized as the Hopfield network by John Hopfield (1982).[62] Another origin of RNN was neuroscience. The word "recurrent" is used to describe loop-like structures in anatomy. In 1901, Cajal observed "recurrent semicircles" in the cerebellar cortex.[63] Hebb considered "reverberating circuit" as an explanation for short-term memory.[64] The McCulloch and Pitts paper (1943) considered neural networks that contain cycles, and noted that the current activity of such networks can be affected by activity indefinitely far in the past.[12]

In 1982 a recurrent neural network with an array architecture (rather than a multilayer perceptron architecture), namely a Crossbar Adaptive Array,[65][66] used direct recurrent connections from the output to the supervisor (teaching) inputs. In addition of computing actions (decisions), it computed internal state evaluations (emotions) of the consequence situations. Eliminating the external supervisor, it introduced the self-learning method in neural networks.

In cognitive psychology, the journal American Psychologist in early 1980's carried out a debate on the relation between cognition and emotion. Zajonc in 1980 stated that emotion is computed first and is independent from cognition, while Lazarus in 1982 stated that cognition is computed first and is inseparable from emotion.[67][68] In 1982 the Crossbar Adaptive Array gave a neural network model of cognition-emotion relation.[65][69] It was an example of a debate where an AI system, a recurrent neural network, contributed to an issue in the same time addressed by cognitive psychology.

Two early influential works were the Jordan network (1986) and the Elman network (1990), which applied RNN to study cognitive psychology.

In the 1980s, backpropagation did not work well for deep RNNs. To overcome this problem, in 1991, Jürgen Schmidhuber proposed the "neural sequence chunker" or "neural history compressor"[70][71] which introduced the important concepts of self-supervised pre-training (the "P" in ChatGPT) and neural knowledge distillation.[10] In 1993, a neural history compressor system solved a "Very Deep Learning" task that required more than 1000 subsequent layers in an RNN unfolded in time.[72]

In 1991, Sepp Hochreiter's diploma thesis[73] identified and analyzed the vanishing gradient problem[73][74] and proposed recurrent residual connections to solve it. He and Schmidhuber introduced long short-term memory (LSTM), which set accuracy records in multiple applications domains.[75][76] This was not yet the modern version of LSTM, which required the forget gate, which was introduced in 1999.[77] It became the default choice for RNN architecture.

During 1985–1995, inspired by statistical mechanics, several architectures and methods were developed by Terry Sejnowski, Peter Dayan, Geoffrey Hinton, etc., including the Boltzmann machine,[78] restricted Boltzmann machine,[79] Helmholtz machine,[80] and the wake-sleep algorithm.[81] These were designed for unsupervised learning of deep generative models.

Deep learning

[edit]

Between 2009 and 2012, ANNs began winning prizes in image recognition contests, approaching human level performance on various tasks, initially in pattern recognition and handwriting recognition.[82][83] In 2011, a CNN named DanNet[84][85] by Dan Ciresan, Ueli Meier, Jonathan Masci, Luca Maria Gambardella, and Jürgen Schmidhuber achieved for the first time superhuman performance in a visual pattern recognition contest, outperforming traditional methods by a factor of 3.[38] It then won more contests.[86][87] They also showed how max-pooling CNNs on GPU improved performance significantly.[88]

In October 2012, AlexNet by Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton[89] won the large-scale ImageNet competition by a significant margin over shallow machine learning methods. Further incremental improvements included the VGG-16 network by Karen Simonyan and Andrew Zisserman[90] and Google's Inceptionv3.[91]

In 2012, Ng and Dean created a network that learned to recognize higher-level concepts, such as cats, only from watching unlabeled images.[92] Unsupervised pre-training and increased computing power from GPUs and distributed computing allowed the use of larger networks, particularly in image and visual recognition problems, which became known as "deep learning".[5]

Radial basis function and wavelet networks were introduced in 2013. These can be shown to offer best approximation properties and have been applied in nonlinear system identification and classification applications.[93]

Generative adversarial network (GAN) (Ian Goodfellow et al., 2014)[94] became state of the art in generative modeling during 2014–2018 period. The GAN principle was originally published in 1991 by Jürgen Schmidhuber who called it "artificial curiosity": two neural networks contest with each other in the form of a zero-sum game, where one network's gain is the other network's loss.[95][96] The first network is a generative model that models a probability distribution over output patterns. The second network learns by gradient descent to predict the reactions of the environment to these patterns. Excellent image quality is achieved by Nvidia's StyleGAN (2018)[97] based on the Progressive GAN by Tero Karras et al.[98] Here, the GAN generator is grown from small to large scale in a pyramidal fashion. Image generation by GAN reached popular success, and provoked discussions concerning deepfakes.[99] Diffusion models (2015)[100] eclipsed GANs in generative modeling since then, with systems such as DALL·E 2 (2022) and Stable Diffusion (2022).

In 2014, the state of the art was training "very deep neural network" with 20 to 30 layers.[101] Stacking too many layers led to a steep reduction in training accuracy,[102] known as the "degradation" problem.[103] In 2015, two techniques were developed to train very deep networks: the highway network was published in May 2015,[104] and the residual neural network (ResNet) in December 2015.[105][106] ResNet behaves like an open-gated Highway Net.

During the 2010s, the seq2seq model was developed, and attention mechanisms were added. It led to the modern Transformer architecture in 2017 in Attention Is All You Need.[107] It requires computation time that is quadratic in the size of the context window. Jürgen Schmidhuber's fast weight controller (1992)[108] scales linearly and was later shown to be equivalent to the unnormalized linear Transformer.[109][110][10] Transformers have increasingly become the model of choice for natural language processing.[111] Many modern large language models such as ChatGPT, GPT-4, and BERT use this architecture.

Models

[edit]
Neuron and myelinated axon, with signal flow from inputs at dendrites to outputs at axon terminals

ANNs began as an attempt to exploit the architecture of the human brain to perform tasks that conventional algorithms had little success with. They soon reoriented towards improving empirical results, abandoning attempts to remain true to their biological precursors. ANNs have the ability to learn and model non-linearities and complex relationships. This is achieved by neurons being connected in various patterns, allowing the output of some neurons to become the input of others. The network forms a directed, weighted graph.[112]

An artificial neural network consists of simulated neurons. Each neuron is connected to other nodes via links like a biological axon-synapse-dendrite connection. All the nodes connected by links take in some data and use it to perform specific operations and tasks on the data. Each link has a weight, determining the strength of one node's influence on another,[113] allowing weights to choose the signal between neurons.

Artificial neurons

[edit]

ANNs are composed of artificial neurons which are conceptually derived from biological neurons. Each artificial neuron has inputs and produces a single output which can be sent to multiple other neurons.[114] The inputs can be the feature values of a sample of external data, such as images or documents, or they can be the outputs of other neurons. The outputs of the final output neurons of the neural net accomplish the task, such as recognizing an object in an image.[citation needed]

To find the output of the neuron we take the weighted sum of all the inputs, weighted by the weights of the connections from the inputs to the neuron. We add a bias term to this sum.[115] This weighted sum is sometimes called the activation. This weighted sum is then passed through a (usually nonlinear) activation function to produce the output. The initial inputs are external data, such as images and documents. The ultimate outputs accomplish the task, such as recognizing an object in an image.[116]

Organization

[edit]

The neurons are typically organized into multiple layers, especially in deep learning. Neurons of one layer connect only to neurons of the immediately preceding and immediately following layers. The layer that receives external data is the input layer. The layer that produces the ultimate result is the output layer. In between them are zero or more hidden layers. Single layer and unlayered networks are also used. Between two layers, multiple connection patterns are possible. They can be 'fully connected', with every neuron in one layer connecting to every neuron in the next layer. They can be pooling, where a group of neurons in one layer connects to a single neuron in the next layer, thereby reducing the number of neurons in that layer.[117] Neurons with only such connections form a directed acyclic graph and are known as feedforward networks.[118] Alternatively, networks that allow connections between neurons in the same or previous layers are known as recurrent networks.[119]

Hyperparameter

[edit]

A hyperparameter is a constant parameter defining any configurable part of the learning process, whose value is set prior to training.[120] Examples of hyperparameters include learning rate, batch size and regularization parameters.[121]. The performance of a neural network is strongly influenced by the choice of hyperparameter values, and thus the hyperparameters are often optimized as part of the training process, a process called hyperparameter tuning or hyperparameter optimization.[122]

Learning

[edit]

Learning is the adaptation of the network to better handle a task by considering sample observations. Learning involves adjusting the weights (and optional thresholds) of the network to improve the accuracy of the result. This is done by minimizing the observed errors. Learning is complete when examining additional observations does not usefully reduce the error rate. Even after learning, the error rate typically does not reach 0. If after learning, the error rate is too high, the network typically must be redesigned. Practically this is done by defining a cost function that is evaluated periodically during learning. As long as its output continues to decline, learning continues. The cost is frequently defined as a statistic whose value can only be approximated. The outputs are actually numbers, so when the error is low, the difference between the output (almost certainly a cat) and the correct answer (cat) is small. Learning attempts to reduce the total of the differences across the observations. Most learning models can be viewed as a straightforward application of optimization theory and statistical estimation.[112][123]

Learning rate

[edit]

The learning rate defines the size of the corrective steps that the model takes to adjust for errors in each observation.[124] A high learning rate shortens the training time, but with lower ultimate accuracy, while a lower learning rate takes longer, but with the potential for greater accuracy. Optimizations such as Quickprop are primarily aimed at speeding up error minimization, while other improvements mainly try to increase reliability. In order to avoid oscillation inside the network such as alternating connection weights, and to improve the rate of convergence, refinements use an adaptive learning rate that increases or decreases as appropriate.[125] The concept of momentum allows the balance between the gradient and the previous change to be weighted such that the weight adjustment depends to some degree on the previous change. A momentum close to 0 emphasizes the gradient, while a value close to 1 emphasizes the last change.[citation needed]

Cost function

[edit]

While it is possible to define a cost function ad hoc, frequently the choice is determined by the function's desirable properties (such as convexity) because it arises from the model (e.g. in a probabilistic model, the model's posterior probability can be used as an inverse cost).[citation needed]

Backpropagation

[edit]

Backpropagation is a method used to adjust the connection weights to compensate for each error found during learning. The error amount is effectively divided among the connections. Technically, backpropagation calculates the gradient (the derivative) of the cost function associated with a given state with respect to the weights. The weight updates can be done via stochastic gradient descent or other methods, such as extreme learning machines,[126] "no-prop" networks,[127] training without backtracking,[128] "weightless" networks,[129][130] and non-connectionist neural networks.[citation needed]

Learning paradigms

[edit]

Machine learning is commonly separated into three main learning paradigms, supervised learning,[131] unsupervised learning[132] and reinforcement learning.[133] Each corresponds to a particular learning task.

Supervised learning

[edit]

Supervised learning uses a set of paired inputs and desired outputs. The learning task is to produce the desired output for each input. In this case, the cost function is related to eliminating incorrect deductions.[134] A commonly used cost is the mean-squared error, which tries to minimize the average squared error between the network's output and the desired output. Tasks suited for supervised learning are pattern recognition (also known as classification) and regression (also known as function approximation). Supervised learning is also applicable to sequential data (e.g., for handwriting, speech and gesture recognition). This can be thought of as learning with a "teacher", in the form of a function that provides continuous feedback on the quality of solutions obtained thus far.

Unsupervised learning

[edit]

In unsupervised learning, input data is given along with the cost function, some function of the data and the network's output. The cost function is dependent on the task (the model domain) and any a priori assumptions (the implicit properties of the model, its parameters and the observed variables). As a trivial example, consider the model where is a constant and the cost . Minimizing this cost produces a value of that is equal to the mean of the data. The cost function can be much more complicated. Its form depends on the application: for example, in compression it could be related to the mutual information between and , whereas in statistical modeling, it could be related to the posterior probability of the model given the data (note that in both of those examples, those quantities would be maximized rather than minimized). Tasks that fall within the paradigm of unsupervised learning are in general estimation problems; the applications include clustering, the estimation of statistical distributions, compression and filtering.

Reinforcement learning

[edit]

In applications such as playing video games, an actor takes a string of actions, receiving a generally unpredictable response from the environment after each one. The goal is to win the game, i.e., generate the most positive (lowest cost) responses. In reinforcement learning, the aim is to weight the network (devise a policy) to perform actions that minimize long-term (expected cumulative) cost. At each point in time the agent performs an action and the environment generates an observation and an instantaneous cost, according to some (usually unknown) rules. The rules and the long-term cost usually only can be estimated. At any juncture, the agent decides whether to explore new actions to uncover their costs or to exploit prior learning to proceed more quickly.

Formally, the environment is modeled as a Markov decision process (MDP) with states and actions . Because the state transitions are not known, probability distributions are used instead: the instantaneous cost distribution , the observation distribution and the transition distribution , while a policy is defined as the conditional distribution over actions given the observations. Taken together, the two define a Markov chain (MC). The aim is to discover the lowest-cost MC.

ANNs serve as the learning component in such applications.[135][136] Dynamic programming coupled with ANNs (giving neurodynamic programming)[137] has been applied to problems such as those involved in vehicle routing,[138] video games, natural resource management[139][140] and medicine[141] because of ANNs ability to mitigate losses of accuracy even when reducing the discretization grid density for numerically approximating the solution of control problems. Tasks that fall within the paradigm of reinforcement learning are control problems, games and other sequential decision making tasks.

Self-learning

[edit]

Self-learning in neural networks was introduced in 1982 along with a neural network capable of self-learning named crossbar adaptive array (CAA).[142] It is a system with only one input, situation s, and only one output, action (or behavior) a. It has neither external advice input nor external reinforcement input from the environment. The CAA computes, in a crossbar fashion, both decisions about actions and emotions (feelings) about encountered situations. The system is driven by the interaction between cognition and emotion.[143] Given the memory matrix, W =||w(a,s)||, the crossbar self-learning algorithm in each iteration performs the following computation:

 In situation s perform action a;
 Receive consequence situation s';
 Compute emotion of being in consequence situation v(s');
 Update crossbar memory w'(a,s) = w(a,s) + v(s').

The backpropagated value (secondary reinforcement) is the emotion toward the consequence situation. The CAA exists in two environments, one is behavioral environment where it behaves, and the other is genetic environment, where from it receives initial emotions (only once) about to be encountered situations in the behavioral environment. Having received the genome vector (species vector) from the genetic environment, the CAA will learn a goal-seeking behavior, in the behavioral environment that contains both desirable and undesirable situations.[144]

Neuroevolution

[edit]

Neuroevolution can create neural network topologies and weights using evolutionary computation. It is competitive with sophisticated gradient descent approaches.[145][146] One advantage of neuroevolution is that it may be less prone to get caught in "dead ends".[147]

Stochastic neural network

[edit]

Stochastic neural networks originating from Sherrington–Kirkpatrick models are a type of artificial neural network built by introducing random variations into the network, either by giving the network's artificial neurons stochastic transfer functions [citation needed], or by giving them stochastic weights. This makes them useful tools for optimization problems, since the random fluctuations help the network escape from local minima.[148] Stochastic neural networks trained using a Bayesian approach are known as Bayesian neural networks.[149]

Topological deep learning

[edit]

Topological deep learning, first introduced in 2017,[150] is an emerging approach in machine learning that integrates topology with deep neural networks to address highly intricate and high-order data. Initially rooted in algebraic topology, TDL has since evolved into a versatile framework incorporating tools from other mathematical disciplines, such as differential topology and geometric topology. As a successful example of mathematical deep learning, TDL continues to inspire advancements in mathematical artificial intelligence, fostering a mutually beneficial relationship between AI and mathematics.

Other

[edit]

In a Bayesian framework, a distribution over the set of allowed models is chosen to minimize the cost. Evolutionary methods,[151] gene expression programming,[152] simulated annealing,[153] expectation–maximization, non-parametric methods and particle swarm optimization[154] are other learning algorithms. Convergent recursion is a learning algorithm for cerebellar model articulation controller (CMAC) neural networks.[155][156]

Modes

[edit]

Two modes of learning are available: stochastic and batch. In stochastic learning, each input creates a weight adjustment. In batch learning, weights are adjusted based on a batch of inputs, accumulating errors over the batch. Stochastic learning introduces "noise" into the process, using the local gradient calculated from one data point; this reduces the chance of the network getting stuck in local minima. However, batch learning typically yields a faster, more stable descent to a local minimum, since each update is performed in the direction of the batch's average error. A common compromise is to use "mini-batches", small batches with samples in each batch selected stochastically from the entire data set.

Types

[edit]

ANNs have evolved into a broad family of techniques that have advanced the state of the art across multiple domains. The simplest types have one or more static components, including number of units, number of layers, unit weights and topology. Dynamic types allow one or more of these to evolve via learning. The latter is much more complicated but can shorten learning periods and produce better results. Some types allow/require learning to be "supervised" by the operator, while others operate independently. Some types operate purely in hardware, while others are purely software and run on general purpose computers.

Some of the main breakthroughs include:

Network design

[edit]

Using artificial neural networks requires an understanding of their characteristics.

  • Choice of model: This depends on the data representation and the application. Model parameters include the number, type, and connectedness of network layers, as well as the size of each and the connection type (full, pooling, etc.). Overly complex models learn slowly.
  • Learning algorithm: Numerous trade-offs exist between learning algorithms. Almost any algorithm will work well with the correct hyperparameters[167] for training on a particular data set. However, selecting and tuning an algorithm for training on unseen data requires significant experimentation.
  • Robustness: If the model, cost function and learning algorithm are selected appropriately, the resulting ANN can become robust.

Neural architecture search (NAS) uses machine learning to automate ANN design. Various approaches to NAS have designed networks that compare well with hand-designed systems. The basic search algorithm is to propose a candidate model, evaluate it against a dataset, and use the results as feedback to teach the NAS network.[168] Available systems include AutoML and AutoKeras.[169] scikit-learn library provides functions to help with building a deep network from scratch. We can then implement a deep network with TensorFlow or Keras.

Hyperparameters must also be defined as part of the design (they are not learned), governing matters such as how many neurons are in each layer, learning rate, step, stride, depth, receptive field and padding (for CNNs), etc.[170] The Python code snippet provides an overview of the training function, which uses the training dataset, number of hidden layer units, learning rate, and number of iterations as parameters:[citation needed]

def train(X, y, n_hidden, learning_rate, n_iter):
    """Training function.

    Args:
      X: Argument X.
      y: Argument y.
      n_hidden: The number of hidden layer units.
      learning_rate: The learning rate.
      n_iter: The number of iterations.

    Returns:
      dict: A dictionary.
    """
    m, n_input = X.shape

    # 1. random initialize weights and biases
    w1 = np.random.randn(n_input, n_hidden)
    b1 = np.zeros((1, n_hidden))
    w2 = np.random.randn(n_hidden, 1)
    b2 = np.zeros((1, 1))

    # 2. in each iteration, feed all layers with the latest weights and biases
    for i in range(n_iter + 1):
        z2 = np.dot(X, w1) + b1
        a2 = sigmoid(z2)
        z3 = np.dot(a2, w2) + b2
        a3 = z3
        dz3 = a3 - y
        dw2 = np.dot(a2.T, dz3)
        db2 = np.sum(dz3, axis=0, keepdims=True)
        dz2 = np.dot(dz3, w2.T) * sigmoid_derivative(z2)
        dw1 = np.dot(X.Y, dz2)
        db1 = np.sum(dz2, axis=0)

        # 3. update weights and biases with gradients
        w1 -= learning_rate * dw1 / m
        w2 -= learning_rate * dw2 / m
        b1 -= learning_rate * db1 / m
        b2 -= learning_rate * db2 / m

        if i % 1000 == 0:
            print("Epoch", i, "loss: ", np.mean(np.square(dz3)))

    model = {"w1": w1, "b1": b1, "w2": w2, "b2": b2}
    return model


Monitoring and concept drift detection of ANNs

[edit]

When neural networks are deployed in real-world applications, the statistical properties of the input data may change over time, a phenomenon known as concept drift or non-stationarity. Drift can reduce predictive accuracy and lead to unreliable or biased decisions if it is not detected and corrected. In practice, this means that the model's accuracy in deployment may differ substantially from the levels observed during training or cross-validation.

Several strategies have been developed to monitor neural networks for drift and degradation:

  • Error-based monitoring: comparing current predictions against ground-truth labels when they become available. This approach directly quantifies predictive performance but may be impractical when labels are delayed or costly to obtain.
  • Data distribution monitoring: detecting changes in the input data distribution using statistical tests, divergence measures, or density-ratio estimation.
  • Representation monitoring: tracking the distribution of internal embeddings or hidden-layer features. Shifts in the latent representation can indicate nonstationarity even when labels are unavailable. Statistical methods such as statistical process control charts have been adapted for this purpose.[171]

Applications

[edit]

Because of their ability to model and reproduce nonlinear processes, artificial neural networks have found applications in many disciplines. These include:

ANNs have been used to diagnose several types of cancers[189][190] and to distinguish highly invasive cancer cell lines from less invasive lines using only cell shape information.[191][192]

ANNs have been used to accelerate reliability analysis of infrastructures subject to natural disasters[193][194] and to predict foundation settlements.[195] It can also be useful to mitigate flood by the use of ANNs for modelling rainfall-runoff.[196] ANNs have also been used for building black-box models in geoscience: hydrology,[197][198] ocean modelling and coastal engineering,[199][200] and geomorphology.[201] ANNs have been employed in cybersecurity, with the objective to discriminate between legitimate activities and malicious ones. For example, machine learning has been used for classifying Android malware,[202] for identifying domains belonging to threat actors and for detecting URLs posing a security risk.[203] Research is underway on ANN systems designed for penetration testing, for detecting botnets,[204] credit cards frauds[205] and network intrusions.

ANNs have been proposed as a tool to solve partial differential equations in physics[206][207][208] and simulate the properties of many-body open quantum systems.[209][210][211][212] In brain research ANNs have studied short-term behavior of individual neurons,[213] the dynamics of neural circuitry arise from interactions between individual neurons and how behavior can arise from abstract neural modules that represent complete subsystems. Studies considered long-and short-term plasticity of neural systems and their relation to learning and memory from the individual neuron to the system level.

It is possible to create a profile of a user's interests from pictures, using artificial neural networks trained for object recognition.[214]

Beyond their traditional applications, artificial neural networks are increasingly being utilized in interdisciplinary research, such as materials science. For instance, graph neural networks (GNNs) have demonstrated their capability in scaling deep learning for the discovery of new stable materials by efficiently predicting the total energy of crystals. This application underscores the adaptability and potential of ANNs in tackling complex problems beyond the realms of predictive modeling and artificial intelligence, opening new pathways for scientific discovery and innovation.[215]

Theoretical properties

[edit]

Computational power

[edit]

The multilayer perceptron is a universal function approximator, as proven by the universal approximation theorem. However, the proof is not constructive regarding the number of neurons required, the network topology, the weights and the learning parameters.

A specific recurrent architecture with rational-valued weights (as opposed to full precision real number-valued weights) has the power of a universal Turing machine,[216] using a finite number of neurons and standard linear connections. Further, the use of irrational values for weights results in a machine with super-Turing power.[217][218][failed verification]

Capacity

[edit]

A model's "capacity" property corresponds to its ability to model any given function. It is related to the amount of information that can be stored in the network and to the notion of complexity. Two notions of capacity are known by the community. The information capacity and the VC Dimension. The information capacity of a perceptron is intensively discussed in Sir David MacKay's book[219] which summarizes work by Thomas Cover.[220] The capacity of a network of standard neurons (not convolutional) can be derived by four rules[221] that derive from understanding a neuron as an electrical element. The information capacity captures the functions modelable by the network given any data as input. The second notion, is the VC dimension. VC Dimension uses the principles of measure theory and finds the maximum capacity under the best possible circumstances. This is, given input data in a specific form. As noted in,[219] the VC Dimension for arbitrary inputs is half the information capacity of a perceptron. The VC Dimension for arbitrary points is sometimes referred to as Memory Capacity.[222]

Convergence

[edit]

Models may not consistently converge on a single solution, firstly because local minima may exist, depending on the cost function and the model. Secondly, the optimization method used might not guarantee to converge when it begins far from any local minimum. Thirdly, for sufficiently large data or parameters, some methods become impractical.

Another issue worthy to mention is that training may cross some saddle point which may lead the convergence to the wrong direction.

The convergence behavior of certain types of ANN architectures are more understood than others. When the width of network approaches to infinity, the ANN is well described by its first order Taylor expansion throughout training, and so inherits the convergence behavior of affine models.[223][224] Another example is when parameters are small, it is observed that ANNs often fit target functions from low to high frequencies. This behavior is referred to as the spectral bias, or frequency principle, of neural networks.[225][226][227][228] This phenomenon is the opposite to the behavior of some well studied iterative numerical schemes such as Jacobi method. Deeper neural networks have been observed to be more biased towards low frequency functions.[229]

Generalization and statistics

[edit]

Applications whose goal is to create a system that generalizes well to unseen examples, face the possibility of over-training. This arises in convoluted or over-specified systems when the network capacity significantly exceeds the needed free parameters.

Two approaches address over-training. The first is to use cross-validation and similar techniques to check for the presence of over-training and to select hyperparameters to minimize the generalization error. The second is to use some form of regularization. This concept emerges in a probabilistic (Bayesian) framework, where regularization can be performed by selecting a larger prior probability over simpler models; but also in statistical learning theory, where the goal is to minimize over two quantities: the 'empirical risk' and the 'structural risk', which roughly corresponds to the error over the training set and the predicted error in unseen data due to overfitting.

Confidence analysis of a neural network

Supervised neural networks that use a mean squared error (MSE) cost function can use formal statistical methods to determine the confidence of the trained model. The MSE on a validation set can be used as an estimate for variance. This value can then be used to calculate the confidence interval of network output, assuming a normal distribution. A confidence analysis made this way is statistically valid as long as the output probability distribution stays the same and the network is not modified.

By assigning a softmax activation function, a generalization of the logistic function, on the output layer of the neural network (or a softmax component in a component-based network) for categorical target variables, the outputs can be interpreted as posterior probabilities. This is useful in classification as it gives a certainty measure on classifications.

The softmax activation function is:


Criticism

[edit]

Training

[edit]

A common criticism of neural networks, particularly in robotics, is that they require too many training samples for real-world operation.[230] Any learning machine needs sufficient representative examples in order to capture the underlying structure that allows it to generalize to new cases. Potential solutions include randomly shuffling training examples, by using a numerical optimization algorithm that does not take too large steps when changing the network connections following an example, grouping examples in so-called mini-batches and/or introducing a recursive least squares algorithm for CMAC.[155] Dean Pomerleau uses a neural network to train a robotic vehicle to drive on multiple types of roads (single lane, multi-lane, dirt, etc.), and a large amount of his research is devoted to extrapolating multiple training scenarios from a single training experience, and preserving past training diversity so that the system does not become overtrained (if, for example, it is presented with a series of right turns—it should not learn to always turn right).[231]

Theory

[edit]

A central claim[citation needed] of ANNs is that they embody new and powerful general principles for processing information. These principles are ill-defined. This allows simple statistical association (the basic function of artificial neural networks) to be described as learning or recognition. In 1997, Alexander Dewdney, a former Scientific American columnist, commented that as a result, artificial neural networks have a

something-for-nothing quality, one that imparts a peculiar aura of laziness and a distinct lack of curiosity about just how good these computing systems are. No human hand (or mind) intervenes; solutions are found as if by magic; and no one, it seems, has learned anything.[232]

One response to Dewdney is that neural networks have been successfully used to handle many complex and diverse tasks, ranging from autonomously flying aircraft[233] to detecting credit card fraud to mastering the game of Go.

Technology writer Roger Bridgman commented:

Neural networks, for instance, are in the dock not only because they have been hyped to high heaven, (what hasn't?) but also because you could create a successful net without understanding how it worked: the bunch of numbers that captures its behaviour would in all probability be "an opaque, unreadable table...valueless as a scientific resource".

In spite of his emphatic declaration that science is not technology, Dewdney seems here to pillory neural nets as bad science when most of those devising them are just trying to be good engineers. An unreadable table that a useful machine could read would still be well worth having.[234]

Although it is true that analyzing what has been learned by an artificial neural network is difficult, it is much easier to do so than to analyze what has been learned by a biological neural network. Moreover, recent emphasis on the explainability of AI has contributed towards the development of methods, notably those based on attention mechanisms, for visualizing and explaining learned neural networks. Furthermore, researchers involved in exploring learning algorithms for neural networks are gradually uncovering generic principles that allow a learning machine to be successful. For example, Bengio and LeCun (2007) wrote an article regarding local vs non-local learning, as well as shallow vs deep architecture.[235]

Biological brains use both shallow and deep circuits as reported by brain anatomy,[236] displaying a wide variety of invariance. Weng[237] argued that the brain self-wires largely according to signal statistics and therefore, a serial cascade cannot catch all major statistical dependencies.

Hardware

[edit]

Large and effective neural networks require considerable computing resources.[238] While the brain has hardware tailored to the task of processing signals through a graph of neurons, simulating even a simplified neuron on von Neumann architecture may consume vast amounts of memory and storage. Furthermore, the designer often needs to transmit signals through many of these connections and their associated neurons – which require enormous CPU power and time.[citation needed]

Some argue that the resurgence of neural networks in the twenty-first century is largely attributable to advances in hardware: from 1991 to 2015, computing power, especially as delivered by GPGPUs (on GPUs), has increased around a million-fold, making the standard backpropagation algorithm feasible for training networks that are several layers deeper than before.[38] The use of accelerators such as FPGAs and GPUs can reduce training times from months to days.[238][239]

Neuromorphic engineering or a physical neural network addresses the hardware difficulty directly, by constructing non-von-Neumann chips to directly implement neural networks in circuitry. Another type of chip optimized for neural network processing is called a Tensor Processing Unit, or TPU.[240]

Practical counterexamples

[edit]

Analyzing what has been learned by an ANN is much easier than analyzing what has been learned by a biological neural network. Furthermore, researchers involved in exploring learning algorithms for neural networks are gradually uncovering general principles that allow a learning machine to be successful. For example, local vs. non-local learning and shallow vs. deep architecture.[241]

Hybrid approaches

[edit]

Advocates of hybrid models (combining neural networks and symbolic approaches) say that such a mixture can better capture the mechanisms of the human mind.[242][243]

Dataset bias

[edit]

Neural networks are dependent on the quality of the data they are trained on, thus low quality data with imbalanced representativeness can lead to the model learning and perpetuating societal biases.[244][245] These inherited biases become especially critical when the ANNs are integrated into real-world scenarios where the training data may be imbalanced due to the scarcity of data for a specific race, gender or other attribute.[244] This imbalance can result in the model having inadequate representation and understanding of underrepresented groups, leading to discriminatory outcomes that exacerbate societal inequalities, especially in applications like facial recognition, hiring processes, and law enforcement.[245][246] For example, in 2018, Amazon had to scrap a recruiting tool because the model favored men over women for jobs in software engineering due to the higher number of male workers in the field.[246] The program would penalize any resume with the word "woman" or the name of any women's college. However, the use of synthetic data can help reduce dataset bias and increase representation in datasets.[247]

[edit]

Recent advancements and future directions

[edit]

Artificial neural networks (ANNs) have undergone significant advancements, particularly in their ability to model complex systems, handle large data sets, and adapt to various types of applications. Their evolution over the past few decades has been marked by a broad range of applications in fields such as image processing, speech recognition, natural language processing, finance, and medicine.[citation needed]

Image processing

[edit]

In the realm of image processing, ANNs are employed in tasks such as image classification, object recognition, and image segmentation. For instance, deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have been important in handwritten digit recognition, achieving state-of-the-art performance.[248] This demonstrates the ability of ANNs to effectively process and interpret complex visual information, leading to advancements in fields ranging from automated surveillance to medical imaging.[248]

Speech recognition

[edit]

By modeling speech signals, ANNs are used for tasks like speaker identification and speech-to-text conversion. Deep neural network architectures have introduced significant improvements in large vocabulary continuous speech recognition, outperforming traditional techniques.[248][249] These advancements have enabled the development of more accurate and efficient voice-activated systems, enhancing user interfaces in technology products.[citation needed]

Natural language processing

[edit]

In natural language processing, ANNs are used for tasks such as text classification, sentiment analysis, and machine translation. They have enabled the development of models that can accurately translate between languages, understand the context and sentiment in textual data, and categorize text based on content.[248][249] This has implications for automated customer service, content moderation, and language understanding technologies.[250]

Control systems

[edit]

In the domain of control systems, ANNs are used to model dynamic systems for tasks such as system identification, control design, and optimization. For instance, deep feedforward neural networks are important in system identification and control applications.[251]

Finance

[edit]

ANNs are used for stock market prediction and credit scoring:

  • In investing, ANNs can process vast amounts of financial data, recognize complex patterns, and forecast stock market trends, aiding investors and risk managers in making informed decisions.[248]
  • In credit scoring, ANNs offer data-driven, personalized assessments of creditworthiness, improving the accuracy of default predictions and automating the lending process.[249]

ANNs require high-quality data and careful tuning, and their "black-box" nature can pose challenges in interpretation. Nevertheless, ongoing advancements suggest that ANNs continue to play a role in finance, offering valuable insights and enhancing risk management strategies.[citation needed]

Medicine

[edit]

ANNs are able to process and analyze vast medical datasets. They enhance diagnostic accuracy, especially by interpreting complex medical imaging for early disease detection, and by predicting patient outcomes for personalized treatment planning.[249] In drug discovery, ANNs speed up the identification of potential drug candidates and predict their efficacy and safety, significantly reducing development time and costs.[248] Additionally, their application in personalized medicine and healthcare data analysis allows tailored therapies and efficient patient care management.[249] Ongoing research is aimed at addressing remaining challenges such as data privacy and model interpretability, as well as expanding the scope of ANN applications in medicine.[citation needed]

Content creation

[edit]

ANNs such as generative adversarial networks (GAN) and transformers are used for content creation across numerous industries.[252] This is because deep learning models are able to learn the style of an artist or musician from huge datasets and generate completely new artworks and music compositions. For instance, DALL-E is a deep neural network trained on 650 million pairs of images and texts across the internet that can create artworks based on text entered by the user.[253] In the field of music, transformers are used to create original music for commercials and documentaries through companies such as AIVA and Jukedeck.[254] In the marketing industry, generative models are used to create personalized advertisements for consumers.[252] Additionally, major film companies are partnering with technology companies to analyze the financial success of a film, such as the partnership between Warner Bros and technology company Cinelytic established in 2020.[255] Furthermore, neural networks have found uses in video game creation, where Non Player Characters (NPCs) can make decisions based on all the characters currently in the game.[256]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Bibliography

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
A in is a composed of interconnected nodes, termed artificial neurons, organized into layers that input through weighted connections and functions to produce outputs, approximating complex functions by iteratively adjusting parameters via algorithms such as . These models draw loose inspiration from biological neural structures but operate fundamentally as statistical optimizers that minimize prediction errors on training datasets, enabling tasks like , regression, and without explicit programming for each scenario. Neural networks underpin modern architectures, where multiple hidden layers allow hierarchical feature extraction, leading to breakthroughs such as surpassing human performance in image recognition on datasets like in 2012, which ignited widespread adoption in , , and applications including game mastery by systems like . Despite these empirical successes, neural networks demand vast quantities of and computational resources for , often exhibiting to adversarial perturbations and poor out-of-distribution , as they primarily capture correlational patterns rather than underlying causal mechanisms. Key limitations include their "" nature, hindering interpretability and raising concerns over reliability in high-stakes domains, alongside debates on whether scaled-up versions can achieve genuine or merely sophisticated . Ongoing seeks to integrate first-principles constraints and hybrid approaches to mitigate these issues, prioritizing robust, data-efficient learning over brute-force scaling.

Fundamentals

Definition and Core Principles

In machine learning, a is a composed of interconnected processing elements called , organized into layers, that approximates functions by learning from through adjustable parameters known as weights and biases. Each receives inputs, computes a weighted , adds a term, and applies a nonlinear to produce an output, enabling the modeling of complex, nonlinear relationships. The network processes via forward propagation, where information flows from input to output layers, and learns by minimizing a that measures the difference between predicted and actual outputs, typically using gradient-based optimization such as . Core principles of neural networks include compositionality, where simple computations are stacked in layers to form hierarchical representations capable of capturing intricate patterns in data, and distributed representation, in which is encoded across many connections rather than localized units, promoting robustness and generalization. Training relies on the chain rule of calculus to compute gradients through , propagating errors backward from output to input layers to update parameters iteratively. A foundational theoretical result is the universal approximation theorem, which demonstrates that a with one hidden layer and a sufficiently large number of s can approximate any on compact subsets of to arbitrary accuracy, provided the is nonlinear such as the sigmoid. This theorem, originally proved by Cybenko for sigmoidal activations, underscores the expressive power of neural networks but does not guarantee efficient learning or avoidance of without regularization.

Relation to Biological Neurons

Artificial neural networks (ANNs) draw conceptual inspiration from biological neural networks (BNNs) found in animal brains, particularly in their use of interconnected processing units to perform computations. The seminal 1943 model by Warren McCulloch and formalized a as a binary threshold logic unit that fires an output if the weighted sum of inputs exceeds a threshold, abstracting the all-or-nothing spiking behavior of biological s. This representation demonstrated that of such simple units could compute any logical function, laying groundwork for viewing the brain as a computational device. Despite the analogy, ANNs represent a highly simplified of biological neurons, which exhibit far greater complexity. Biological neurons integrate thousands of synaptic inputs over time via dendrites, accumulate through temporal summation, and propagate discrete action potentials (spikes) along axons when a threshold is reached, modulated by channels and neurotransmitters. In contrast, standard artificial neurons compute a static weighted sum of all inputs at once, apply a continuous like sigmoid or ReLU, and lack inherent temporal dynamics or spiking mechanisms. Synapses in BNNs undergo local plasticity rules, such as Hebbian learning where "neurons that fire together wire together," enabling adaptation without global error signals, whereas ANNs rely on , a non-local requiring symmetric weight changes and precise error derivatives that has no direct biological counterpart. Further divergences include scale, operation, and efficiency: human brains contain approximately 86 billion neurons and 10^15 synapses operating asynchronously in recurrent loops with continuous activity, achieving low-energy inference around 20 watts, while typical ANNs, even large ones with billions of parameters, process data synchronously in feedforward layers during discrete training epochs and demand massive computational resources for optimization. Efforts to enhance biological plausibility, such as spiking neural networks (SNNs) that emulate temporal spike-based communication, have shown promise for energy efficiency but lag behind conventional ANNs in performance on complex tasks due to challenges in training. Overall, while the neuron analogy spurred initial development, the empirical success of modern ANNs stems more from mathematical optimization than faithful replication of neural biology.

Historical Development

Origins and Early Models (1940s–1960s)

The foundational mathematical model for artificial neural networks emerged in 1943 with the work of Warren S. McCulloch and , who proposed a simplified abstraction of biological neurons as binary threshold logic units that compute the logical OR of inputs exceeding a firing threshold. In their paper "A Logical Calculus of the Ideas Immanent in Nervous Activity," they proved that interconnected networks of these units could realize any finite , establishing the computational universality of such systems and inspiring subsequent efforts to simulate brain-like processing through logical networks. This model treated neurons as deterministic devices without learning mechanisms, focusing instead on representational power derived from connectivity. In 1949, advanced the field by introducing a learning postulate in "The Organization of Behavior," suggesting that synaptic connections strengthen when presynaptic and postsynaptic neurons activate simultaneously—"neurons that fire together wire together"—providing a biologically motivated rule for unsupervised weight adjustment in neural models. This Hebbian learning principle enabled associative memory formation and influenced early simulations of plasticity, though it required refinements to avoid unbounded weight growth. Practical implementations followed in the late 1950s. developed the in 1957–1958 at , a single-layer network with adjustable weights trained via a supervised error-correction rule to classify linearly separable inputs, demonstrated on hardware like the Mark I Perceptron unveiled by the U.S. in July 1958. Concurrently, in 1959, Bernard Widrow and Marcian Hoff at Stanford introduced the ADALINE (adaptive linear neuron), which minimized mean-squared error using the least mean squares algorithm for tasks, applied initially to adaptive filtering and . These early models, limited to single layers, highlighted supervised learning's potential but revealed challenges with non-linear separability, setting the stage for later critiques.

AI Winters and Perceptron Limitations (1960s–1980s)

The , introduced by in the late 1950s, generated significant early interest in the 1960s for its potential in tasks, with hardware implementations like the Mark I Perceptron deployed by 1960 for applications such as character recognition. However, this enthusiasm waned following the 1969 publication of Perceptrons by and , which rigorously proved the model's computational limitations. Single-layer perceptrons, operating via linear threshold functions, could only separate linearly separable data in input space, failing on problems requiring non-linear boundaries, such as the XOR function where inputs (0,0) and (1,1) map to 0, while (0,1) and (1,0) map to 1. Minsky and Papert further demonstrated that perceptrons could not detect topological properties like connectedness or parity in patterns without an exponential increase in the number of neurons, making scaling infeasible for complex tasks. These mathematical results exposed the perceptron's inability to approximate arbitrary functions without additional layers or mechanisms, a limitation rooted in its restriction to partitions rather than hierarchical feature representations. Although Minsky and Papert acknowledged multi-layer networks in principle, they argued that training such structures lacked effective algorithms at the time, and their focus on hardware amplified perceptions of the entire connectionist paradigm as fundamentally flawed. The book's critique, disseminated widely in academic circles, fueled the " controversy," leading to a precipitous drop in research funding by the early 1970s; for instance, U.S. military sponsors curtailed support for projects, shifting resources toward symbolic AI systems promising more immediate rule-based solutions. This downturn coincided with the broader first (approximately 1974–1980), characterized by slashed budgets—U.S. AI research funding fell from peaks in the late to minimal levels by mid-decade—and skepticism over unmet hype from earlier decades. Contributing factors included critical reports like the 1973 in the UK, which highlighted AI's failure to deliver on grand promises, prompting government funding cuts that echoed in the U.S. via reallocations amid post-Vietnam fiscal scrutiny. Neural network efforts persisted marginally in isolated academic pockets, but the era's computational constraints—limited to mainframes with megabytes of memory—and absence of gradient-based training methods like ensured stagnation, with researchers viewing as empirically underpowered compared to expert systems. Into the early 1980s, residual optimism around parallel processing waned as multi-layer networks still lacked scalable learning rules, reinforcing the perception of neural approaches as theoretically intriguing yet practically limited, with funding remaining scarce until algorithmic breakthroughs later in the decade. The period underscored causal realities: single-layer models' linear separability constraint prevented to non-convex problems prevalent in real , a deficiency not resolvable without deeper architectures and optimization techniques that emerged post-1980s.

Backpropagation and Revival (1980s–1990s)

The revival of neural network research in the 1980s stemmed from advances addressing the perceptron's inability to handle nonlinearly separable problems, particularly through the development of methods for training multi-layer networks. In 1982, John Hopfield introduced the Hopfield network, a recurrent architecture capable of storing and retrieving patterns as associative memories via energy minimization, which demonstrated the potential of symmetric connectionist models for content-addressable storage and sparked renewed theoretical interest. This work, grounded in statistical physics analogies, highlighted how networks could exhibit stable states representing memories, influencing subsequent dynamical systems approaches. Central to the era's breakthroughs was the widespread adoption of , an efficient for computing gradients in networks by propagating errors backward through layers using the chain rule. Although precursors existed—such as Paul Werbos's 1974 thesis applying dynamic programming to neural nets and Seppo Linnainmaa's 1970 technique—the 's practical significance for multi-layer learning was popularized by David Rumelhart, , and Ronald Williams in their 1986 paper, "Learning Representations by Back-Propagating Errors." Their simulations showed enabling hidden layers to learn hierarchical features, such as phonological representations from text, far outperforming prior methods in tasks like pattern recognition. This paralleled the release of the multi-volume "Parallel Distributed Processing" series edited by Rumelhart and James McClelland, which framed neural networks as cognitively plausible models of learning via local adjustments, fostering the connectionist paradigm. By the late , facilitated practical applications, including Yann LeCun's 1989 implementation of for handwritten digit recognition at , achieving error rates below 1% on ZIP code data through shared weights and subsampling. Government initiatives, such as Japan's project starting in 1982, injected funding into and AI, indirectly boosting neural network hardware explorations like custom VLSI chips for . In the 1990s, extensions emerged, such as recurrent for sequential data and momentum-accelerated gradient descent to mitigate local minima, but persistent issues like vanishing gradients in deep architectures and limited compute power tempered enthusiasm, contributing to a second lull in funding by mid-decade. Despite these constraints, the decade solidified as the cornerstone of supervised training, with empirical demonstrations on benchmarks like the NETtalk system reading aloud in 1987, laying groundwork for future scalability.

Deep Learning Resurgence (2006–2010s)

In 2006, and collaborators introduced deep belief networks (DBNs), a comprising stacked restricted Boltzmann machines trained layer-wise in an manner to initialize deep architectures, thereby addressing vanishing gradient challenges during subsequent supervised fine-tuning. This method enabled effective learning of hierarchical feature representations from unlabeled data, outperforming shallow networks on tasks like digit recognition and demonstrating the feasibility of multi-layer networks previously plagued by training difficulties. The approach, detailed in a Neural Computation paper, marked a theoretical and empirical revival of by showing that pre-training could provide good starting points for optimization in directed nets. Parallel advances in computational hardware facilitated this resurgence, with researchers leveraging graphics processing units (GPUs) for accelerated parallel matrix operations essential to training. As early as 2006, groups including those at the Swiss AI Lab IDSIA employed GPU-based implementations for convolutional s, achieving faster training on vision tasks compared to CPU-only systems. By 2009–2010, further optimizations, such as those by Raina et al. for deep networks on image data, highlighted GPUs' role in scaling to larger models and datasets, reducing training times from weeks to days. These hardware enablers, combined with algorithmic innovations like rectified linear activations and dropout regularization emerging in the late , laid groundwork for practical deployments. The period culminated in empirical breakthroughs during early competitions, validating deep architectures' superiority. In 2010, deep networks excelled in handwriting and image classification benchmarks, signaling growing viability. The 2012 ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge provided definitive momentum, as , , and Hinton's —a eight-layer convolutional network trained on two GPUs—attained a top-5 error rate of 15.3%, surpassing the second-place entry's 26.2% by leveraging massive , ReLU activations, and . This result, presented at NeurIPS, catalyzed industry investment and shifted paradigms toward end-to-end for perceptual tasks, though skeptics noted reliance on specific hardware and data scale.

Scaling Laws and Large-Scale Models (2020s Onward)

In the early , empirical studies revealed predictable power-law relationships governing the performance of large neural networks, particularly transformer-based models, as a function of training compute, model parameters, and . Kaplan et al. (2020) analyzed models up to 100 billion parameters and found that loss LL scales approximately as L(N)NαL(N) \propto N^{-\alpha}, L(D)DβL(D) \propto D^{-\beta}, and L(C)CγL(C) \propto C^{-\gamma}, with exponents α0.076\alpha \approx 0.076, β0.103\beta \approx 0.103, and γ0.050\gamma \approx 0.050 for modeling tasks, indicating that increasing model yields gains per unit of compute. This suggested prioritizing larger architectures over extensive data, influencing the design of models like , which featured 175 billion parameters trained on approximately 300 billion tokens. Subsequent work refined these laws, highlighting the need for balanced resource allocation. Hoffmann et al. (2022) demonstrated that prior emphases on model size overlooked data scaling; their compute-optimal frontier required dataset tokens to scale linearly with parameters, approximately 20 tokens per parameter, challenging the data-underdosing in earlier large models. Training the 70-billion-parameter Chinchilla model on 1.4 trillion tokens achieved superior performance on benchmarks like MMLU (67.5% accuracy) compared to the larger 280-billion-parameter Gopher, using similar compute budgets, underscoring inefficiencies in parameter-heavy but data-light approaches. These findings prompted reevaluations, with replications confirming the joint scaling of parameters and data while noting sensitivities to data quality and distribution shifts. As models scaled to trillions of parameters and beyond, previously absent capabilities—termed emergent abilities—surfaced discontinuously with size. Wei et al. (2022) documented phenomena such as in-context learning, where models perform few-shot tasks effectively only above certain scales (e.g., multi-step arithmetic in 62-billion-parameter models but not smaller ones), and chain-of-thought prompting, enabling reasoning improvements without architectural changes. Examples include GPT-3's proficiency in translation and summarization emerging at 175 billion parameters, and PaLM's (540 billion parameters) advances in BIG-Bench tasks. Critics argue these "emergences" reflect metric discontinuities rather than fundamental shifts, as smooth improvements appear under log-linear plotting; nonetheless, empirical evidence from models like (estimated 1.7 trillion parameters, 2023) supports scaling's role in unlocking generalization across diverse tasks, including coding and mathematics. By 2023–2025, the scaling hypothesis—that continued increases in compute and data would yield broadly intelligent systems—gained substantiation from deployed models and theoretical models. Frameworks like variance-limited and resolution-limited regimes explain power-law behaviors through optimization dynamics, predicting diminishing but persistent returns as networks approximate Bayesian posteriors on data manifolds. Investments in infrastructure, such as GPU clusters exceeding 10,000 units, enabled training runs with 102510^{25} FLOPs, as in Grok-1 (314 billion parameters, mixture-of-experts architecture) and Llama 3 (405 billion parameters), which exhibited reduced perplexity and enhanced few-shot performance aligning with extrapolated laws. However, challenges emerged, including data scarcity (internet text nearing exhaustion at 101310^{13} tokens), rising energy costs (e.g., GPT-4 training estimated at 1.3 GWh), and plateaus in synthetic data efficacy, prompting explorations into efficient architectures like sparse models and post-training alignment to sustain gains without indefinite brute-force scaling.

Architectural Components

Artificial Neurons and Activation Functions

An functions as the basic processing element in neural networks, computing a weighted of input values plus a term, followed by application of a nonlinear to produce an output. Mathematically, for inputs x1,,xnx_1, \dots, x_n with weights w1,,wnw_1, \dots, w_n and bb, the pre-activation value is z=iwixi+bz = \sum_i w_i x_i + b, and the output is a=f(z)a = f(z), where ff denotes the . This structure enables the to model decision boundaries and transform inputs selectively. The concept traces to the 1943 McCulloch-Pitts model, which formalized neurons as binary threshold units performing logical operations via a step that outputs 1 if the weighted sum exceeds a threshold, else 0, demonstrating universal computation for finite-state machines. In 1958, extended this with the , incorporating adjustable weights trained via error-driven updates and a hard threshold , allowing for linearly separable patterns. These early designs emphasized binary decisions but laid groundwork for continuous variants in modern networks. Activation functions impart nonlinearity, preventing multilayer networks from degenerating into equivalent single-layer linear regressors, as compositions of linear functions remain linear and thus cannot capture the nonlinear mappings required for tasks like image recognition or . Without nonlinearity, deep architectures lose expressive power, limiting approximation capabilities to affine transformations regardless of depth. Early networks favored sigmoid σ(z)=11+ez\sigma(z) = \frac{1}{1 + e^{-z}}, which squashes inputs to (0,1) and provides smooth differentiability for gradient-based , though its saturation leads to vanishing gradients where derivatives approach zero for large |z|, impeding learning in deep layers. Hyperbolic tangent tanh(z)=ezezez+ez\tanh(z) = \frac{e^z - e^{-z}}{e^z + e^{-z}} centers outputs around zero in (-1,1), mitigating some bias issues over sigmoid but retaining saturation problems. Rectified Linear Unit (ReLU), defined as f(z)=max(0,z)f(z) = \max(0, z), gained prominence after empirical demonstrations in showed faster convergence and reduced vanishing risks due to constant 1 for positive inputs, though it risks "dying" neurons where negative inputs yield zero gradients. Variants like Leaky ReLU f(z)=max(αz,z)f(z) = \max(\alpha z, z) with small α>0\alpha > 0 address dying ReLUs by allowing minor negative slopes. More advanced functions, such as Swish f(z)=zσ(βz)f(z) = z \cdot \sigma(\beta z) (introduced 2017), offer smoother non-monotonicity and superior performance in vision tasks by enabling negative activations without saturation. Selection depends on task demands, with ReLU dominating due to simplicity and efficiency in large-scale training.

Layers, Weights, and Initialization Strategies

are structured as sequences of layers, where each layer comprises multiple artificial neurons that perform linear transformations followed by nonlinear activations on inputs from the preceding layer. The input layer accepts raw data features, hidden layers extract hierarchical representations through successive transformations, and the output layer generates predictions or classifications. Connections between neurons in adjacent layers are parameterized by weights, enabling the network to model complex mappings from input to output. Weights represent the learnable parameters that scale the influence of each input to a neuron, computed as the of input vectors and weight matrices, often augmented by biases for affine transformations. During training, these parameters are updated via to minimize a , adjusting connection strengths based on error signals propagated backward. The total number of weights scales with layer sizes, for instance, between layers of sizes mm and nn, there are m×nm \times n weights. Poor initialization can cause vanishing gradients, where signals diminish exponentially through layers due to repeated multiplications by small values, or exploding gradients from large values leading to numerical . Initializing all weights to zero results in symmetric neurons that fail to differentiate during , while uniform random small values often underperform in deep networks by causing saturation in activations like sigmoid. Xavier (Glorot) initialization addresses this by sampling weights from a distribution with zero mean and variance \frac{2}{\text{fan_in} + \text{fan_out}}, preserving activation variance across layers for symmetric activations like tanh, as derived from assuming linear propagation and matching input-output variances. For ReLU activations, which zero out half the outputs, He initialization uses variance \frac{2}{\text{fan_in}} to maintain signal scale, compensating for the rectification's variance reduction. These methods, empirically validated in deep architectures, accelerate convergence and improve final performance compared to naive random initialization.

Hyperparameters and Design Choices

Hyperparameters in neural networks are configuration values set prior to that govern the learning process and model structure, distinct from learned parameters such as weights. These include settings like , batch size, network depth, and width, which influence convergence speed, stability, and generalization performance. Unlike parameters optimized via , hyperparameters require manual or automated tuning, as their optimal values depend on the , task, and architecture. The determines the step size for updating weights during , critically affecting training dynamics. A high learning rate can cause the optimization to diverge by overshooting minima, while a low rate leads to slow convergence or entrapment in suboptimal local minima, often necessitating more epochs. Empirical studies show that adaptive schedules, such as , mitigate these issues by reducing the rate over time, improving final accuracy on benchmarks like image classification tasks. Batch size specifies the number of training samples processed before a parameter update, balancing computational efficiency and quality. Larger batches provide more stable estimates, enabling faster convergence and utilization of hardware parallelism, but they can degrade by reducing the noise beneficial for escaping sharp minima. Smaller batches introduce stochasticity that enhances robustness, though they increase time and variance in loss; optimal sizes often range from 32 to 256, scaled with model size and memory constraints. Network depth (number of layers) and width (neurons per layer) represent core architectural hyperparameters, trading expressivity against trainability. Deeper networks capture hierarchical features effectively, as demonstrated in convolutional architectures where added layers improve accuracy on datasets like up to a point of vanishing gradients. Wider networks parallelize computations and mitigate underfitting in shallow models but risk without regularization; studies indicate that for fixed parameters, wider shallow nets sometimes match deep narrow ones in representation power, though depth generally yields better scaling with data volume. Other design choices include the number of epochs, which controls total training iterations and risks if excessive, and regularization strengths like dropout rates (typically 0.2–0.5) to prevent co-adaptation of neurons. Optimizer selection, such as over SGD, incorporates and adaptive rates, accelerating convergence but requiring tuned betas (e.g., β1=0.9, β2=0.999). Hyperparameter tuning methods systematically explore this space to maximize validation performance. Grid search exhaustively tests combinations but scales poorly with dimensionality; proves more efficient for high dimensions by sampling uniformly. Advanced techniques like model the objective as a to prioritize promising configurations, reducing evaluations by 10–100x compared to brute force, while evolutionary algorithms mimic for robust global optima. In practice, cross-validation ensures tuning avoids dataset-specific biases, with tools like Tuner automating searches over layers and rates.

Training Mechanisms

Forward Propagation and Computation Graph

Forward propagation, also known as the forward pass, is the process by which input data traverses a neural network from the input layer to the output layer, computing intermediate activations and the final prediction through successive linear transformations and nonlinear activations. In a feedforward neural network, this begins with the input vector x\mathbf{x} being multiplied by the weight matrix W(l)\mathbf{W}^{(l)} of layer ll, added to the bias vector b(l)\mathbf{b}^{(l)} to yield the pre-activation z(l)=W(l)a(l1)+b(l)\mathbf{z}^{(l)} = \mathbf{W}^{(l)} \mathbf{a}^{(l-1)} + \mathbf{b}^{(l)}, where a(l1)\mathbf{a}^{(l-1)} is the activation from the previous layer (with a(0)=x\mathbf{a}^{(0)} = \mathbf{x}). The activation a(l)\mathbf{a}^{(l)} is then obtained by applying a nonlinear activation function σ\sigma to z(l)\mathbf{z}^{(l)}, such as the rectified linear unit (ReLU) σ(z)=max(0,z)\sigma(z) = \max(0, z), which introduces nonlinearity essential for modeling complex functions. This process repeats layer by layer until the output layer produces y^\hat{\mathbf{y}}, which for classification tasks might undergo softmax to yield probabilities. Intermediate values are typically stored during this pass to enable efficient gradient computation in the subsequent backward pass. The graph provides a structured representation of the forward propagation as a (DAG), where nodes correspond to variables (inputs, intermediates, outputs) or operations (e.g., , , ), and directed edges denote dependencies. In this graph, the forward pass evaluates nodes in , starting from input nodes and propagating values forward to compute outputs, mirroring the layer-wise calculations while explicitly capturing element-wise operations for scalar, vector, or tensor computations. For instance, a simple scalar operation c=(a+b)×dc = (a + b) \times d forms a graph with and multiplication nodes, allowing the forward pass to compute cc by first evaluating the sum then the product. This graph structure facilitates automatic differentiation, as local gradients can be computed at each node using the chain rule during the backward pass, but for forward propagation alone, it ensures modular and efficient evaluation, particularly in frameworks handling dynamic graphs. graphs thus decompose complex network evaluations into primitive operations, enabling scalability to deep architectures with millions of parameters. In practice, forward 's efficiency relies on optimized linear algebra routines, such as matrix-vector multiplications implemented via BLAS libraries, which achieve near-peak hardware utilization on GPUs for batch sizes exceeding 32 samples. For a network with LL layers, the time is O(l=1Ldl1dl)O(\sum_{l=1}^L d_{l-1} d_l), where dld_l is the dimensionality of layer ll, dominated by dense matrix multiplies in wide layers. graphs enhance this by allowing fused operations, reducing memory overhead through in-place updates where possible, and supporting vectorized implementations that exploit parallelism. While forward propagation itself does not involve learning, its outputs feed into loss computation, closing the inference loop in supervised paradigms.

Backpropagation and Gradient Descent

Backpropagation computes the gradients of the loss function with respect to each weight and bias in a neural network by applying the chain rule in a backward pass through the computational graph, enabling efficient differentiation for multi-layer architectures. This process begins after the forward propagation, where activations are calculated layer by layer; errors are then propagated from the output layer backward, reusing intermediate computations to avoid redundant calculations. The algorithm's efficiency stems from reverse-mode automatic differentiation, which scales linearly with the number of parameters rather than exponentially, making it feasible for deep networks with millions of weights. The foundational description of backpropagation appeared in Paul Werbos's 1974 PhD thesis, where he outlined its use for dynamic systems, though it gained prominence after David Rumelhart, , and Ronald Williams demonstrated its application to learning internal representations in layered networks in their 1986 paper, which included simulations showing convergence on tasks like encoding/decoding patterns. Earlier precursors include Seppo Linnainmaa's 1970 work on reverse-mode differentiation for numerical computations. In practice, for a layer's weights wjlw_{jl}, the is Cwjl=δlak\frac{\partial C}{\partial w_{jl}} = \delta_l a_k, where δl\delta_l is the error term derived via as δl=mCzmwmlσ(zl)\delta_l = \sum_m \frac{\partial C}{\partial z_m} w_{ml} \sigma'(z_l), with σ\sigma' the activation derivative; this recurses backward from the output δL=aCσ(zL)\delta^L = \nabla_a C \odot \sigma'(z^L). Gradient descent then utilizes these gradients to update parameters iteratively: wwηCww \leftarrow w - \eta \frac{\partial C}{\partial w}, where η\eta is the , a small positive scalar controlling step size to minimize CC. This method assumes the loss landscape is differentiable and seeks minima by descending the steepest direction; in neural networks, it is typically implemented as (SGD), using mini-batches for noisy but faster updates that escape poor minima compared to full-batch . Empirical evidence from early simulations showed that combining backpropagation-computed gradients with enabled networks to learn non-trivial representations, such as parity functions, previously challenging for simpler algorithms. Variants like accelerate convergence by incorporating past gradients, addressing issues like slow progress in ravines. Challenges in this paradigm include vanishing gradients in deep networks, where chain-multiplied derivatives approach zero, impeding learning in early layers—a issue mitigated later by activations like ReLU but evident in sigmoid-based models from the 1980s. Despite these, with formed the core training mechanism, powering the revival of neural networks by enabling scalable optimization grounded in rather than biologically inspired heuristics.

Loss Functions, Optimizers, and Regularization

Loss functions quantify the difference between a neural network's predictions and the true target values, serving as the objective to minimize during training. For regression tasks with continuous outputs, the (MSE), defined as the average of squared differences between predicted and actual values, is commonly used due to its differentiability and emphasis on larger errors. (MAE) provides an alternative, measuring average absolute differences and being more robust to outliers, though less sensitive to large deviations. In classification problems, loss, which penalizes confident wrong predictions more heavily, outperforms MSE by aligning with probabilistic interpretations of outputs, particularly when paired with softmax . Binary cross-entropy applies to two-class cases, while categorical cross-entropy handles multi-class scenarios. Optimizers iteratively adjust network parameters to reduce the loss, leveraging gradients computed via . Stochastic gradient descent (SGD) updates weights as wwηLw \leftarrow w - \eta \nabla L, where η\eta is the and L\nabla L the , but can suffer from slow convergence in high dimensions. Momentum-enhanced SGD accelerates progress by incorporating past gradients, aiding escape from local minima. RMSprop addresses vanishing gradients by normalizing updates with the of recent gradients, using an exponentially decaying average. Adam, proposed by Kingma and Ba in , combines momentum and adaptive per-parameter learning rates from RMSprop, employing bias-corrected first and second moment estimates for robust performance across diverse architectures. Regularization techniques mitigate overfitting by constraining model complexity or introducing stochasticity. L1 regularization adds the sum of absolute weights to the loss, promoting sparsity by driving irrelevant weights to zero. L2 regularization, or weight decay, penalizes the sum of squared weights, shrinking all parameters toward zero without eliminating them, which smooths the . Dropout randomly deactivates a of neurons during forward passes in training—typically 20-50%—forcing the network to learn redundant representations and reducing co-adaptation, though it is disabled at with scaled activations. These methods are often combined, with hyperparameters tuned via validation to balance underfitting and risks.

Network Variants

Feedforward and Multilayer Perceptrons

neural networks consist of artificial neurons arranged in layers where information propagates unidirectionally from input to output without forming cycles or recurrent connections. Each neuron computes a weighted of its inputs, adds a term, and applies a nonlinear to produce its output, which serves as input to subsequent layers. This architecture enables the modeling of nonlinear relationships through composition of transformations across layers. The single-layer , a foundational model, was introduced by in as a probabilistic mechanism for capable of learning weights via a supervised update rule. However, single-layer networks are restricted to linearly separable data, as demonstrated by their inability to solve problems like the XOR function, a limitation highlighted in theoretical analyses showing that linear thresholds cannot capture non-convex decision boundaries. Multilayer perceptrons (MLPs) extend feedforward networks by incorporating one or more hidden layers between the input and output layers, with full connectivity between consecutive layers and nonlinear activations such as sigmoids or ReLUs in hidden units. This structure, popularized in the 1980s alongside backpropagation for training, allows MLPs to approximate complex functions by creating hierarchical feature representations. The universal approximation theorem establishes that a single hidden layer with sufficiently many neurons and a continuous, non-constant activation function can approximate any continuous function on a compact subset of Euclidean space to arbitrary precision, provided the network width scales appropriately. In practice, MLP depth and width are hyperparameters tuned to balance expressivity and computational cost; deeper networks risk optimization challenges like vanishing gradients during training with , though mitigated by modern initializations and activations. MLPs serve as baselines for tasks like tabular data and regression but are often outperformed by specialized architectures for structured data such as images or sequences due to parameter inefficiency in capturing spatial or temporal invariances.

Convolutional Neural Networks for Spatial Data

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) constitute a class of deep neural networks tailored for processing grid-structured exhibiting spatial correlations, such as two-dimensional images or three-dimensional volumetric , by exploiting local connectivity and parameter sharing to detect hierarchical patterns like edges, shapes, and objects. Unlike fully connected networks, which treat inputs as flat vectors and incur quadratic growth in parameters for high-resolution spatial —for instance, a 224×224×3 image would require over 150,000 input weights per in a fully connected layer—CNNs apply learnable filters (kernels) via operations that scan local receptive fields, drastically reducing parameters while preserving translation equivariance. This design draws from biological precedents, including receptive fields in mammalian identified by Hubel and Wiesel in the 1960s, and early computational models like Fukushima's in 1980, which introduced multi-layered feature extraction without . The core architecture of a CNN for spatial data typically comprises stacked convolutional layers, each producing feature maps by sliding kernels—small matrices of weights, e.g., 3×3 or 5×5—over the input to compute dot products with local patches, followed by nonlinear activations like ReLU to introduce sparsity and gradient flow. Pooling layers, often max-pooling with 2×2 windows and stride 2, then subsample these maps to enforce translation invariance, diminish computational load, and mitigate by selecting dominant features. Subsequent layers build deeper representations: early layers capture low-level features (e.g., oriented edges), while deeper ones aggregate into high-level semantics (e.g., object parts). The network culminates in fully connected layers for , though modern variants like fully convolutional networks omit these for dense tasks such as segmentation. Stride and hyperparameters control output dimensions, with valid padding preserving edges but shrinking maps, and same padding maintaining size. Pioneered by in 1989 with LeNet-1 for handwritten digit recognition, CNNs demonstrated efficacy on grayscale images via constrained connectivity and shared weights, achieving generalization through minimized free parameters. LeNet-5, refined by 1998, processed 32×32 inputs with two convolutional layers, subsampling, and a output, attaining 99.5% accuracy on MNIST after training on 60,000 samples. A watershed occurred in 2012 when , an eight-layer CNN with five convolutional and three fully connected layers, trained on ImageNet's 1.2 million 224×224 RGB images using GPUs and dropout regularization, reduced top-5 error to 15.3%—surpassing the prior best by over 10 percentage points—and catalyzed the resurgence by proving scalability for natural image classification. These advances stem from causal mechanisms: enforces inductive biases aligning with spatial data's locality and stationarity, enabling efficient feature hierarchies that fully connected networks cannot match without prohibitive parameters or data. For spatial data beyond , CNNs extend to tasks like (e.g., via region proposals) and semantic segmentation (e.g., fully convolutional variants), where deconvolutional layers upsample features to pixel-wise predictions. Empirical superiority arises from reduced risk—e.g., AlexNet's 60 million parameters versus billions for equivalent fully connected models—and robustness to translations, as pooling and strides yield invariant representations verifiable on benchmarks like , where CNNs consistently outperform dense alternatives. However, limitations include sensitivity to rotational or scale variations without augmentations, addressed in later architectures like rotation-equivariant CNNs. Overall, CNNs' efficacy for spatial data rests on verifiable reductions in parameter count (orders of magnitude for high-resolution inputs) and superior , as quantified by benchmark error rates.

Recurrent and Sequence-Processing Networks

Recurrent neural networks (RNNs) process sequential data by incorporating loops that allow information to persist across time steps, enabling the modeling of dependencies in inputs like or text. In a basic RNN, the hidden state hth_t at time tt is updated as ht=tanh(Whhht1+Wxhxt+bh)h_t = \tanh(W_{hh} h_{t-1} + W_{xh} x_t + b_h), where xtx_t is the input, WW matrices are weights, and bhb_h is bias; the output yty_t follows as yt=Whyht+byy_t = W_{hy} h_t + b_y. Training occurs via through time (BPTT), unfolding the network temporally to compute gradients over sequences. A key limitation of RNNs is the , where repeated multiplication of gradients during BPTT causes them to diminish exponentially for earlier time steps, hindering learning of long-term dependencies. This issue, analyzed by Hochreiter in 1991, arises particularly with saturating activations like tanh, as partial derivatives approach zero. Exploding gradients, conversely, lead to unstable updates from excessively large values. To mitigate these, (LSTM) units were introduced by Hochreiter and Schmidhuber in 1997, featuring a cell state ctc_t and three gates—input, forget, and output—to selectively regulate information flow and preserve gradients over long sequences. The forget gate computes ft=σ(Wf[ht1,xt]+bf)f_t = \sigma(W_f [h_{t-1}, x_t] + b_f), updating ct=ftct1+itc~tc_t = f_t \odot c_{t-1} + i_t \odot \tilde{c}_t, where σ\sigma is sigmoid, \odot is element-wise , and c~t\tilde{c}_t is candidate values; output uses ot=σ(Wo[ht1,xt]+bo)o_t = \sigma(W_o [h_{t-1}, x_t] + b_o) with ht=ottanh(ct)h_t = o_t \odot \tanh(c_t). LSTMs demonstrated efficacy in tasks requiring extended memory, such as , outperforming vanilla RNNs by maintaining non-vanishing gradients. Gated recurrent units (GRUs), proposed by Cho et al. in 2014, simplify LSTMs with two gates—update and reset—merging cell and hidden states into one, reducing parameters by about 25% while achieving comparable performance on sequence tasks. The update gate zt=σ(Wz[ht1,xt])z_t = \sigma(W_z [h_{t-1}, x_t]) balances prior and new states, and reset gate rt=σ(Wr[ht1,xt])r_t = \sigma(W_r [h_{t-1}, x_t]) modulates input to candidate h~t=tanh(W[rtht1,xt])\tilde{h}_t = \tanh(W [r_t \odot h_{t-1}, x_t]), yielding ht=(1zt)ht1+zth~th_t = (1 - z_t) \odot h_{t-1} + z_t \odot \tilde{h}_t. GRUs train faster than LSTMs due to fewer computations, proving effective in where they matched LSTM accuracy with lower complexity. Empirical studies show GRUs often suffice over LSTMs for resource-constrained settings without significant accuracy loss. Bidirectional RNNs extend unidirectional variants by processing sequences forward and backward, concatenating hidden states for context-aware representations, as in where future tokens inform past predictions. Applications span , including language modeling and ; time series forecasting, like stock prediction; and speech tasks, where RNNs achieved state-of-the-art error rates below 10% on benchmarks by 2015. Despite successes, RNNs' sequential computation limits scalability, prompting shifts to parallelizable alternatives for very long sequences.

Attention-Based Architectures and Transformers

Attention mechanisms in neural networks allow models to weigh the relevance of different parts of the input sequence dynamically, addressing limitations of recurrent architectures in capturing long-range dependencies without sequential processing bottlenecks. Introduced in the context of sequence-to-sequence models for , attention computes a context vector as a weighted sum of encoder hidden states, where weights are derived from alignment scores between decoder states and encoder outputs. The original formulation by Bahdanau et al. in 2014 used an additive scoring function, defined as et,i=vTtanh(Whhi+Wsst+b)e_{t,i} = v^T \tanh(W_h h_i + W_s s_t + b), followed by softmax to obtain weights αt,i\alpha_{t,i}, enabling the model to focus on relevant source words during decoding. This approach improved translation quality on long sentences compared to fixed-length context vectors, achieving higher scores on English-to-French tasks, such as 37.5 on NIST data versus 34.8 for baselines without alignment learning. Subsequent developments generalized attention to self-attention and dot-product variants, computing scores as inner products between query and key vectors, score(Q,K)=QKT\text{score}(Q, K) = Q K^T. To stabilize gradients in high-dimensional spaces, scaled dot-product attention divides scores by dk\sqrt{d_k}
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.