FPL: False Positive Loss

Abstract

When training deep neural networks tasks, the most popular choices are cross-entropy loss. On the other hand, in general speaking, a decent loss function can take on shapes that are considerably more flexible and ought to be adapted for different activities and datasets. In most of the classification tasks, generally if the true class is not correctly recognized by the network (top1), that class is placed among the five classes with the highest probability (top5). This shows that the network does not necessarily recognize the correct class with a low probability, but a class similar to it (such as 3 vs. 8 in mnist) assigns a higher probability and this causes a mistake in that task. Accordingly, we proposed a loss function deals with the error of class that the neural network incorrectly recognized as correct, in addition to the correct class error. We call our proposed loss as False Positive Loss (FPL), with the intention of viewing and designing loss functions not only through the utilization of true class but also through the utilization of the value of false positive classes. One of the core properties of our proposed loss is full adaptability, which makes False Positive Loss be fully capable of getting reformulated by using other widely used loss functions formulas based on the task or the need of the users. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that our suggested loss function outperforms other well-known losses on a variety of tasks and datasets. As can be observed, the performance of our False Positive Loss is superior to that of the cross-entropy loss when it comes to tasks involving 2D picture classification. We have compared our loss with cross entropy as the most common classification loss function on some models (such as ResNet-18, ResNet-50 and Efficientnet-V2) through classification known as a basic computer vision task. with both random or pre-trained initial weights. As a result, in some cases the models with our loss outperform the same tasks with cross entropy from the viewpoint of some metric (i.e. accuracy and FP). For example, the resnet-50 on cifar-10 dataset with random initialization indicated a top1 accuracy of 94.93 with cross entropy and 95.25 with our loss, while for top5 accuracy the results are 99.86 and 99.87, respectively.

Graph Attention Networks for Drug Combination Discovery: Targeting Pancreatic Cancer Genes with RAIN Protocol

“…Conversely, artificial intelligence has garnered attention across diverse medical realms in recent times, ranging from protein folding and medical imaging to cohort studies and fundamental alterations in neural networks. [200], [201], [202], [203], [204] Recent publications introduce the RAIN protocol as a novel approach, involving the combination of drug associations to disease treatment, evaluating by p-value metric. The p-value indicating the association between the disease and target proteins/genes is near one.…”

“…Conversely, artificial intelligence has garnered attention across diverse medical realms in recent times, ranging from protein folding and medical imaging to cohort studies and fundamental alterations in neural networks. [200], [201], [202], [203], [204]…”