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
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Simple memory: a theory for archicortex
Marr, D. (1971) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B, Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.1971.0078 · Cited by 2,771
Non-Holographic Associative Memory
WILLSHAW, D. J., BUNEMAN, O. P., & LONGUET-HIGGINS, H. C. (1969) · Nature · doi:10.1038/222960a0 · Cited by 979
The orbitofrontal cortex: Neuronal activity in the behaving monkey
Thorpe, S. J., Rolls, E. T., & Maddison, S. (1983) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/bf00235545 · Cited by 836
Self-citationRolls, E. T., Sienkiewicz, Z. J., & Yaxley, S. (1989) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.1989.tb00774.x · Cited by 466
Self-citation
Cited by
Computational analysis of the role of the hippocampus in memory
Treves, A., & Rolls, E. T. (1994) · Hippocampus · doi:10.1002/hipo.450040319 · Cited by 1,272
Self-citationSpatial selectivity of unit activity in the hippocampal granular layer
Jung, M. W., & McNaughton, B. L. (1993) · Hippocampus · doi:10.1002/hipo.450030209 · Cited by 789
Treves, A., & Rolls, E. T. (1992) · Hippocampus · doi:10.1002/hipo.450020209 · Cited by 707
Self-citationA computational theory of hippocampal function, and empirical tests of the theory
Rolls, E. T., & Kesner, R. P. (2006) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2006.04.005 · Cited by 608
Self-citationGustatory, olfactory, and visual convergence within the primate orbitofrontal cortex
Rolls, E., & Baylis, L. (1994) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.14-09-05437.1994 · Cited by 587
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Rolls, E., & Treves, A.
- Venue
- Network: Computation in Neural Systems
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- 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.