MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010359042 · doi:10.1037/a0030301

Encoding structure in holographic reduced representations.

2012· article· en· W2010359042 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew A. Kelly, Dorothea Blostein, D. J. K. Mewhort

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFerroelectric and Negative Capacitance Devices
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEncoding (memory)Content-addressable memoryDecoding methodsENCODEComputer scienceShufflingAssociative propertyArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Theoretical computer scienceAlgorithmArtificial neural networkMathematicsBiologyPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vector Symbolic Architectures (VSAs) such as Holographic Reduced Representations (HRRs) are computational associative memories used by cognitive psychologists to model behavioural and neurological aspects of human memory. We present a novel analysis of the mathematics of VSAs and a novel technique for representing data in HRRs. Encoding and decoding in VSAs can be characterised by Latin squares. Successful encoding requires the structure of the data to be orthogonal to the structure of the Latin squares. However, HRRs can successfully encode vectors of locally structured data if vectors are shuffled. Shuffling results are illustrated using images but are applicable to any nonrandom data. The ability to use locally structured vectors provides a technique for detailed modelling of stimuli in HRR models.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentaleSame topicFerroelectric and Negative Capacitance DevicesFrench-language works237,207