src
- North America > United States > California > San Diego County > San Diego (0.04)
- North America > Canada > Quebec > Montreal (0.04)
- Asia > Japan > Honshū > Chūbu > Ishikawa Prefecture > Kanazawa (0.04)
- Health & Medicine (0.67)
- Information Technology (0.46)
- Asia > China > Shanghai > Shanghai (0.24)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Information Technology > Sensing and Signal Processing > Image Processing (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Vision (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Natural Language (1.00)
- Information Technology > Artificial Intelligence > Machine Learning > Neural Networks > Deep Learning (0.94)
- Europe > Austria > Vienna (0.14)
- North America > United States > Virginia (0.04)
- North America > United States > Illinois > Champaign County > Urbana (0.04)
- Asia > China > Beijing > Beijing (0.04)
- North America > United States > Illinois (0.04)
- Europe > Italy > Calabria > Catanzaro Province > Catanzaro (0.04)
- (2 more...)
- Research Report > Experimental Study (1.00)
- Research Report > New Finding (0.67)
- North America > United States > Illinois (0.05)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- Asia > Japan > Honshū > Chūbu > Ishikawa Prefecture > Kanazawa (0.04)
- North America > Canada > British Columbia > Metro Vancouver Regional District > Vancouver (0.04)
- Europe > Switzerland (0.04)
- Europe > Germany > North Rhine-Westphalia > Cologne Region > Bonn (0.04)
- Europe > France > Île-de-France (0.04)
A Appendix
In the appendix, we have the following results. In Appendix A.1, we summarize the main notations used in this paper. In Appendix A.2 - A.9, we show all the proofs of our theoretical results. In Appendix A.10, we present the overall training procedures (e.g., pseudo code) of our proposed DINO-INIT and DINO-TRAIN algorithms, as well as the limitations of our work. Assume that all the parameters of f() follows standard normal distribution, in the limits as the layer width d!1, the output function of the distribution-informed neural network f(x) in Eq (5) at initialization is iid centered Gaussian process, i.e., f() N 0, K Using the definition of the distribution kernel in Eq. (6), we have K It is shown [4] that the key difference between NNGP kernel and NTK is that NTK is generated by a fully-trained neural network, whereas NNGP kernel is produced by a weakly-trained neural network.
- North America > United States > Nebraska (0.04)
- North America > United States > Illinois (0.04)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- North America > United States > Illinois > Champaign County > Urbana (0.04)
- Food & Agriculture (0.67)
- Government (0.46)