MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153759339 · doi:10.1109/icsmc.1994.399853

A monolithic silicon nonlinear lateral inhibition model

2002· article· en· W2153759339 on OpenAlexafffund
Sheldon J. Hood, E. Jernigan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsLateral inhibitionNonlinear systemMultiplicative functionFunction (biology)Computer scienceArtificial neural networkModulation (music)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionEdge enhancementCMOSImage processingElectronic engineeringBiological systemArtificial intelligenceEngineeringImage (mathematics)NeurosciencePhysicsBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lateral inhibition is a term often used to describe a type of interaction between neural processing units that occupy the same processing layer. The interactions are characterized by processing unit activity tending to inhibit activity in neighbouring processing units. There is strong evidence to suggest that multiplicative lateral inhibition processes are active in the retinal neural layers. Moreover, these multiplicative lateral inhibition processes are responsible for many early vision processing functions such as edge enhancement and contrast enhancement. This paper describes a hardware model for a nonlinear lateral inhibition model. The model is based on a current shunting mechanism. The model was designed to be integrated onto a monolithic piece of silicon. The design is described and the expected features of the modulation transfer function are discussed. The device was fabricated in a 1.5 /spl mu/m p-well, CMOS process.>

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207