Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.



Re: ANN_Error Goal
Posted:
Feb 10, 2013 2:05 PM


Subject: ANN_Error Goal From: Suresh Date: 10 Feb, 2013 13:34:09 "Suresh" wrote in message <kf87kh$dta$1@newscl01ah.mathworks.com>... > Dear Greg, > As you told I am following these steps to estimate Error goal for an example set. > >[I N]=size(Input);[13x178] > >[O N]=size(Target);[3x178] > From the size of above matrices > >I = 13 ; O = 3 ;N = 178 ; H =10
Did H=10 come out of midair?
If you do not use validation stopping or regularization, (e.g.,msereg) Neq > Nw is required. This results in the upper bound
Hub = 1 + ceil( (NeqO)/(I+O+1)) = 31
To mitigate measurement error and noise, Neq >> Nw is desired. A reasonable first try in a search for a practical value is
H ~ round(Hub/10) = 3
Design Ntrials ~ 10 random initial weight designs. If unsuccessfull, increase H. However I would not exceed ~ Hub/2 ~ 15 unless using valstopping or regularization.
If you use valstopping or regularization, you can even use H > Hub. However, I find those values esthetically displeasing.
> > Nw = (I+1)*H+(H+1)*O = (13+1)*10 + (10+1)*3 = 173 > > Neq = N*O = 178*3 = 534 % Is this correct ? > > Ndof = NeqNw = 534173 = 361 > > MSE00a = mean(var(Target')) = 0.2207 > MSEgoal=0.01*361*0.2207/534 = 0.0015; > Is this procedure correct.
The procedure I would use is described above. However, if you use valstopping or regularization, H = 10 will probably not be too large. When you finish let us know your values for H and R2a. Hope this helps. Greg
PS I have seen people use BOTH valstopping AND regularization. ... Whatever floats your boat!



