Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Armand Mihai Nicolicioiu

dblp:300/4213 · also Armand Nicolicioiu · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Learning theory · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization
0.812024
Neural Redshift: Random Networks are not Random Functions · CVPR 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory
inductive bias
0.812024
Neural Redshift: Random Networks are not Random Functions · CVPR 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory › inductive bias
simplicity bias
0.812024
Neural Redshift: Random Networks are not Random Functions · CVPR 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

weight space sampling · 0.8complexity analysis · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Neural Redshift: Random Networks are not Random Functions
abstract
Our understanding of the generalization capabilities of neural networks (NNs) is still incomplete. Prevailing explanations are based on implicit biases of gradient de-scent (GD) but they cannot account for the capabilities of models from gradient-free methods [9] nor the simplicity bias recently observed in untrained networks [29]. This paper seeks other sources of generalization in NNs. Findings. To understand the inductive biases provided by architectures independently from GD, we examine un-trained, random-weight networks. Even simple MLPs show strong inductive biases: uniform sampling in weight space yields a very biased distribution of functions in terms of complexity. But unlike common wisdom, NNs do not have an inherent “simplicity bias”. This property depends on components such as ReLUs, residual connections, and layer normalizations. Alternative architectures can be built with a bias for any level of complexity. Transformers also inherit all these properties from their building blocks. Implications. We provide a fresh explanation for the success of deep learning independent from gradient-based training. It points at promising avenues for controlling the solutions implemented by trained models.
Damien Teney, Armand Mihai Nicolicioiu, Valentin Hartmann, Ehsan Abbasnejad
CVPR2