Cited by 136Neural Networks and ApplicationsNeural dynamics and brain functionTheoretical and Computational Physics

On a Model of Associative Memory with Huge Storage Capacity

Open access
Demircigil, Mete, Heusel, Judith, Löwe, Matthias, Upgang, Sven, Vermet, Franck·2017·Journal of Statistical Physics

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10955-017-1806-y

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Interaction functions of the form F(x) = exp(x) lead to exponential storage capacity of 2^{d/2} where all stored patterns are fixed points but the radius of attraction vanishes.

    “Interaction functions of the form F ( x ) = exp( x ) lead to exponential storage capacity of 2 d/ 2 where all stored patterns are fixed points but the radius of attraction vanishes (Demircigil et al., 2017).”

    From Hopfield Networks is All You Need (2020) · cites this paper as Demircigil et al., 2017

    The discussion before Theorem 1.3 (p. 3) explicitly rejects the claim that exponential capacity requires a vanishing radius of attraction: it says the dynamics can repair a number of random errors of order N. Theorem 1.3 (p. 4) considers errors at a positive Hamming radius ρN. It gives capacity M = exp(αN) + 1 for α < log(2)/2, rather than asserting capacity exactly 2^{d/2}. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Modern binary Hopfield networks with energy functions based on interaction functions of the form F(x)=exp(x) lead to storage capacity of 2^{d/2}, where all stored binary patterns are fixed points but the radius of attraction vanishes.

    “Modern binary Hopfield networks with energy functions based on interaction functions of the form F ( x ) = exp( x ) even lead to storage capacity of 2 d/ 2 , where all stored binary patterns are fixed points but the radius of attraction vanishes (Demircigil et al., 2017).”

    From Hopfield Networks is All You Need (2020) · cites this paper as Demircigil et al., 2017

    Theorem 1.3 (p. 4) establishes exponential storage for F(x)=exp(x) with M=exp(αd)+1 for α<log(2)/2, and Remark 1.4 says all stored patterns are fixed points with probability tending to one. The claimed 2^{d/2} is the limiting exponent, not a capacity established at equality. The assertion that the radius of attraction vanishes is not supported as stated: the discussion preceding the theorem (p. 3) says the model can repair a number of random errors proportional to d, and the theorem allows a positive attraction radius at lower storage exponents. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The exponential interaction function energy leads to an exponential storage capacity of N = 2^{d/2} for binary patterns.

    “This energy leads to an exponential storage capacity of N = 2 d/ 2 for binary patterns.”

    From Hopfield Networks is All You Need (2020) · cites this paper as Demircigil et al., 2017

    Theorem 1.3 (p. 4) establishes exponential storage for binary patterns, but specifies M = exp(αN) + 1 only for α < log(2)/2. Thus the paper supports rates approaching 2^(d/2), not the stated capacity exactly at 2^(d/2). (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Demircigil et al. generalized the model to exponential interaction functions F(x)=exp(x), giving energy E = -exp(lse(1, X^T ξ)).

    “This model was generalized by Demircigil et al. (Demircigil et al., 2017) to exponential interaction functions F ( x ) = exp( x ) , which gives the energy E = -exp(lse(1 , X T ξ )) .”

    From Hopfield Networks is All You Need (2020) · cites this paper as Demircigil et al., 2017

    Theorem 1.3 (p. 4) explicitly studies the generalized Hopfield model with interaction function F(x)=e^x. The available text does not state the claimed energy formula E=-exp(lse(1, Xᵀξ)); the relevant formulas are not decoded in our copy, so that part cannot be verified. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • With a single update, the fixed point is recovered with high probability in the Demircigil et al. model.

    “Furthermore, with a single update the fixed point is recovered with high probability.”

    From Hopfield Networks is All You Need (2020) · cites this paper as Demircigil et al., 2017

    The Proof of Theorem 1.3 (p. 6) says the model corrects random errors by updating each neuron once, and the proof (p. 7) says the probability of an incorrect neuron update vanishes as the number of neurons grows. This supports high-probability recovery after one pass through the neurons, not necessarily after a single neuron update. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [7][7] D. Krotov and J. J. Hopfield. Dense associative memory for pattern recognition. In D. D. Lee, M. Sugiyama, U. V. Luxburg, I. Guyon, and R. Garnett, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 29 , pages 1172-1180. Curran Associates, Inc., 2016. -
  2. [10][10] M. L¨ owe. The storage capacity of generalized Hopfield models with semantically correlated patterns. Markov Process. Related Fields , 5(1):1-19, 1999. -

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Demircigil, M., Heusel, J., Löwe, M., Upgang, S., & Vermet, F.
Affiliations
  • École Normale Supérieure - PSL (FR)
  • University of Münster (DE)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Vermet, Franck
Venue
Journal of Statistical Physics
Published
2017-05-19
Volume
168
Issue
2
Pages
288-299
ISSN
  • 0022-4715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-9613
OpenAlex
W2587333550
Cited by
136
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3
FWCI
2.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Statistical Physics (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Condensed Matter Physics › Theoretical and Computational Physics
Keywords
associative memory, Hopfield neural network, storage capacity, basins of attraction, artificial neural networks

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review