Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 209

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The relative advantages of sparse versus distributed encoding for associative neuronal networks in the brain

Rolls, Edmund, Treves, Alessandro·1990·Network: Computation in Neural Systems

Abstract

In some neuronal networks in the brain which are thought to operate as associative memories, a sparse coding of information can enhance the storage capacity. The extent to which this statement is valid in general is discussed here, by considering some simple formal models of associative memory which include different neurobiological constraints. In nets of linear neurons, trained with either a Hebbian (purely incremental) or a Stanton and Sejnowski learning rule, sparse coding increases the number of independent associations that can be stored. When neurons are nonlinear, for a diversity of learning rules, sparse coding may result in an increase in the number of patterns that can be discriminated. The analysis is then used to help interpret recent evidence on the encoding of information in the taste and visual systems, as obtained from recordings in primates. Following the taste pathway, it is found that the breadth of tuning of individual neurons becomes progressively finer, consistent with the idea that sparser representations become advantageous as the taste information is eventually associated with that coming from other sensory modalities. In the visual system, considering a population of neurons in the temporal cortex that respond preferentially to faces, it is argued that their breadth of tuning represents a compromise between fully distributed encoding, and a grandmother cell type of encoding, which would result in a given neuron responding only to an individual face.

Overview

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 · 10.1088/0954-898x/1/4/002

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 209

Metadata

Authors
Rolls, E., & Treves, A.
Venue
Network: Computation in Neural Systems
Published
1990-10-01
Volume
1
Issue
4
Pages
407-421
ISSN
  • 0954-898X (ISSN-L)
  • 1361-6536
OpenAlex
W2103331118
Cited by
209
References
4
FWCI
7.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The relative advantages of sparse versus distributed encoding for associative neuronal networks in the brain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0954-898x/1/4/002
The paper
Rolls, E., & Treves, A. (1990). The relative advantages of sparse versus distributed encoding for associative neuronal networks in the brain. Network: Computation in Neural Systems. https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-898x/1/4/002

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.