REVIEW 2 cited by
A Comprehensive Overview and Comparative Analysis on Deep Learning Models: CNN, RNN, LSTM, GRU
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
A Comprehensive Overview and Comparative Analysis on Deep Learning Models: CNN, RNN, LSTM, GRU
read the original abstract
Deep learning (DL) has emerged as a powerful subset of machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI), outperforming traditional ML methods, especially in handling unstructured and large datasets. Its impact spans across various domains, including speech recognition, healthcare, autonomous vehicles, cybersecurity, predictive analytics, and more. However, the complexity and dynamic nature of real-world problems present challenges in designing effective deep learning models. Consequently, several deep learning models have been developed to address different problems and applications. In this article, we conduct a comprehensive survey of various deep learning models, including Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), Recurrent Neural Network (RNN), Temporal Convolutional Networks (TCN), Transformer, Kolmogorov-Arnold networks (KAN), Generative Models, Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL), and Deep Transfer Learning. We examine the structure, applications, benefits, and limitations of each model. Furthermore, we perform an analysis using three publicly available datasets: IMDB, ARAS, and Fruit-360. We compared the performance of six renowned deep learning models: CNN, RNN, Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), Bidirectional LSTM, Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU), and Bidirectional GRU alongside two newer models, TCN and Transformer, using the IMDB and ARAS datasets. Additionally, we evaluated the performance of eight CNN-based models, including VGG (Visual Geometry Group), Inception, ResNet (Residual Network), InceptionResNet, Xception (Extreme Inception), MobileNet, DenseNet (Dense Convolutional Network), and NASNet (Neural Architecture Search Network), for image classification tasks using the Fruit-360 dataset.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
KAN-LSTM-Transformer Neural Networks, MFV and Cosmological Parameters
KLT-Net reconstructs the SN Ia distance modulus non-parametrically; with MFV M_B and flat-ΛCDM Bayesian/Hessian inference it yields H0 ≈ 69.6 km s⁻¹ Mpc⁻¹ and Ωm ≈ 0.30.
-
Comparative Evaluation of Machine Learning Models for Predicting Donor Kidney Discard
On 4080 German deceased donors, an ensemble ML model reached MCC 0.76 for kidney discard prediction, with standardized preprocessing and feature selection proving more important than the specific algorithm chosen.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.