↓ Skip to main content

Derivation of a Novel Efficient Supervised Learning Algorithm from Cortical-Subcortical Loops

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Derivation of a Novel Efficient Supervised Learning Algorithm from Cortical-Subcortical Loops
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2011.00050
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ashok Chandrashekar, Richard Granger

Abstract

Although brain circuits presumably carry out powerful perceptual algorithms, few instances of derived biological methods have been found to compete favorably against algorithms that have been engineered for specific applications. We forward a novel analysis of a subset of functions of cortical-subcortical loops, which constitute more than 80% of the human brain, thus likely underlying a broad range of cognitive functions. We describe a family of operations performed by the derived method, including a non-standard method for supervised classification, which may underlie some forms of cortically dependent associative learning. The novel supervised classifier is compared against widely used algorithms for classification, including support vector machines (SVM) and k-nearest neighbor methods, achieving corresponding classification rates - at a fraction of the time and space costs. This represents an instance of a biologically derived algorithm comparing favorably against widely used machine learning methods on well-studied tasks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 7%
Japan 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 37 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 30%
Researcher 8 19%
Student > Master 7 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 3 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 10 23%
Psychology 7 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 14%
Engineering 5 12%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 4 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 May 2017.
All research outputs
#18,351,676
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#1,050
of 1,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,082
of 244,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#55
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 244,195 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.