In this task, you are given a part of an article. Your task is to generate headline (title) for this text. Preferred headlines are under fifteen words.

Q: In this paper we compare different types of recurrent units in recurrent neural networks (RNNs). Especially, we focus on more sophisticated units that implement a gating mechanism, such as a long short-term memory (LSTM) unit and a recently proposed gated recurrent unit (GRU). We evaluate these recurrent units on the tasks of polyphonic music modeling and speech signal modeling. Our experiments revealed that these advanced recurrent units are indeed better than more traditional recurrent units such as tanh units. Also, we found GRU to be comparable to LSTM.

A: Empirical Evaluation of Gated Recurrent Neural Networks on Sequence Modeling
****
Q: In this paper, we address the problem of embedded feature selection for ranking on top of the list problems. We pose this problem as a regularized empirical risk minimization with p-norm push loss function (p = ) and sparsity inducing regularizers. We leverage the issues related to this challenging optimization problem by considering an alternating direction method of multipliers algorithm which is built upon proximal operators of the loss function and the regularizer. Our main technical contribution is thus to provide a numerical scheme for computing the infinite push loss function proximal operator. Experimental results on toy, DNA microarray and BCI problems show how our novel algorithm compares favorably to competitors for ranking on top while using fewer variables in the scoring function.

A: Sparse Support Vector Infinite Push
****
Q: Deep learning has been shown as a successful machine learning method for a variety of tasks, and its popularity results in numerous open-source deep learning software tools coming to public. Training a deep network is usually a very time-consuming process. To address the huge computational challenge in deep learning, many tools exploit hardware features such as multi-core CPUs and many-core GPUs to shorten the training time. However, different tools exhibit different features and running performance when training different types of deep networks on different hardware platforms, which makes it difficult for end users to select an appropriate pair of software and hardware. In this paper, we aim to make a comparative study of the state-of-the-art GPU-accelerated deep learning software tools, including Caffe, CNTK, TensorFlow, and Torch. We benchmark the running performance of these tools with three popular types of neural networks on two CPU platforms and three GPU platforms. Our contribution is twofold. First, for deep learning end users, our benchmarking results can serve as a guide to selecting appropriate software tool and hardware platform. Second, for deep learning software developers, our in-depth analysis points out possible future directions to further optimize the training performance.

A:
Benchmarking State-of-the-Art Deep Learning Software Tools
****