Cited by 6,091Neural Networks and ApplicationsMachine Learning and ELMStochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques

Approximation capabilities of multilayer feedforward networks

Hornik, Kurt·1991·Neural Networks

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0893-6080(91)90009-t

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • For ordinal deep learning models such as FFNs and CNNs, deep architecture benefits from universal approximation power and expressive capacity.

    “For ordinal deep learning models, such as FFNs and CNNs, deep architecture immediately benefits from the universal approximation power and expressive capacity (Cybenko, 1989; Hornik, 1991; Telgarsky, 2016; Lu et al., 2017; Petersen & Voigtlaender, 2020; Zhou, 2020).”
  • General-purpose neural networks are universal approximators, allowing functional relationships to be learned.

    “Instead, general-purpose neural networks are universal approximators, allowing functional relationships to be learned 62,63 .”

    From Machine culture (2023) · cites this paper as [62]

  • These proofs showed that SLP-NN approximators, which employed a sufficient number of neurons of continuous sigmoidal activation type, were universal approximators, capable of approximating any continuous function to any desired accuracy.

    “These proofs showed that SLP-NN approximators, which employed sufficient number of neurons of continuous sigmoidal activation type (a constraint introduced by Cybenko and relaxed by Hornik), were universal approximators, capable of approximating any continuous function to any desired accuracy.”
  • Their primary motive was to improve accuracy over traditional AR methods, supported by rigorous independent mathematical proofs published in the late eighties and early nineties by Cybenko, Hornik, and Funahashi.

    “Their primary motive was to improve accuracy over traditional AR methods.This was supported by rigorous independent mathematical proofs published in the late eighties and the early nineties by Cybenko [106], Hornik [196], and Funahashi [158].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hornik, K.
Affiliations
TU Wien (AT)
Corresponding author
Hornik, Kurt
Venue
Neural Networks
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1991
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
251-257
ISSN
0893-6080 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1988115241
Cited by
6,091
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 290 · 2025: 426 · 2024: 399 · 2023: 455 · 2022: 485 · 2021: 716 · 2020: 586 · 2019: 523 · 2018: 346 · 2017: 243 · 2016: 157 · 2015: 112 · 2014: 104 · 2013: 95 · 2012: 103
FWCI
35.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Neural Networks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and ELM
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Stochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
Keywords
multilayer perceptron, universal approximation, single hidden layer, Lp approximation, uniform approximation, continuous functions, derivative approximation, hidden units

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