In this task, you are given the abstract of a research paper. Your task is to generate a summary of this abstract. Your summary should not be very short, but it's better if it's not more than 30 words.

We revisit the Recurrent Attention Model (RAM, Mnih et al. (2014)), a recurrent neural network for visual attention, from an active information sampling perspective. 

 We borrow ideas from neuroscience research on the role of active information sampling in the context of visual attention and gaze (Gottlieb, 2018), where the author suggested three types of motives for active information sampling strategies. We find the original RAM model only implements one of them.

 We identify three key weakness of the original RAM and provide a simple solution by adding two extra terms on the objective function. The modified RAM 1) achieves faster convergence, 2) allows dynamic decision making per sample without loss of accuracy, and 3) generalizes much better on longer sequence of glimpses which is not trained for, compared with the original RAM. 

 Inspired by neuroscience research, solve three key weakness of the widely-cited recurrent attention model by simply adding two terms on the objective function.

As Artificial Intelligence (AI) becomes an integral part of our life, the development of explainable AI, embodied in the decision-making process of an AI or robotic agent, becomes imperative.   For a robotic teammate, the ability to generate explanations to explain its behavior is one of the key requirements of an explainable agency. Prior work on explanation generation focuses on supporting the reasoning behind the robot's behavior. These approaches, however, fail to consider the mental workload needed to understand the received explanation. In other words, the human teammate is expected to understand any explanation provided, often before the task execution, no matter how much information is presented in the explanation.
 In this work, we argue that an explanation, especially complex ones, should be made in an online fashion during the execution, which helps spread out the information to be explained and thus reducing the mental workload of humans. However, a challenge here is that the different parts of an explanation are dependent on each other, which must be taken into account when generating online explanations. To this end, a general formulation of online explanation generation is presented along with three different implementations satisfying different online properties. We base our explanation generation method on a model reconciliation setting introduced in our prior work. Our approaches are evaluated both with human subjects in a standard planning competition (IPC) domain, using NASA Task Load Index (TLX), as well as in simulation with ten different problems across two IPC domains.

We introduce online explanation to consider the cognitive requirement of the human for understanding the generated explanation by the agent.

Weight decay is one of the standard tricks in the neural network toolbox, but the reasons for its regularization effect are poorly understood, and recent results have cast doubt on the traditional interpretation in terms of $L_2$ regularization.
 Literal weight decay has been shown to outperform $L_2$ regularization for optimizers for which they differ. 
 We empirically investigate weight decay for three optimization algorithms (SGD, Adam, and K-FAC) and a variety of network architectures. We identify three distinct mechanisms by which weight decay exerts a regularization effect, depending on the particular optimization algorithm and architecture: (1) increasing the effective learning rate, (2) approximately regularizing the input-output Jacobian norm, and (3) reducing the effective damping coefficient for second-order optimization. 
 Our results provide insight into how to improve the regularization of neural networks.

We investigate weight decay regularization for different optimizers and identify three distinct mechanisms by which weight decay improves generalization.