↓ Skip to main content

Is a 4-Bit Synaptic Weight Resolution Enough? – Constraints on Enabling Spike-Timing Dependent Plasticity in Neuromorphic Hardware

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
5 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Is a 4-Bit Synaptic Weight Resolution Enough? – Constraints on Enabling Spike-Timing Dependent Plasticity in Neuromorphic Hardware
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2012.00090
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Pfeil, Tobias C. Potjans, Sven Schrader, Wiebke Potjans, Johannes Schemmel, Markus Diesmann, Karlheinz Meier

Abstract

Large-scale neuromorphic hardware systems typically bear the trade-off between detail level and required chip resources. Especially when implementing spike-timing dependent plasticity, reduction in resources leads to limitations as compared to floating point precision. By design, a natural modification that saves resources would be reducing synaptic weight resolution. In this study, we give an estimate for the impact of synaptic weight discretization on different levels, ranging from random walks of individual weights to computer simulations of spiking neural networks. The FACETS wafer-scale hardware system offers a 4-bit resolution of synaptic weights, which is shown to be sufficient within the scope of our network benchmark. Our findings indicate that increasing the resolution may not even be useful in light of further restrictions of customized mixed-signal synapses. In addition, variations due to production imperfections are investigated and shown to be uncritical in the context of the presented study. Our results represent a general framework for setting up and configuring hardware-constrained synapses. We suggest how weight discretization could be considered for other backends dedicated to large-scale simulations. Thus, our proposition of a good hardware verification practice may rise synergy effects between hardware developers and neuroscientists.

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 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Japan 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 96 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 35%
Student > Master 19 19%
Researcher 18 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 6 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 35 35%
Computer Science 19 19%
Physics and Astronomy 10 10%
Neuroscience 9 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 9 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 16 August 2022.
All research outputs
#3,322,356
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#2,509
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,071
of 250,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#28
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
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 250,087 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.