↓ Skip to main content

Energy Scaling Advantages of Resistive Memory Crossbar Based Computation and Its Application to Sparse Coding

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
83 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 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
Energy Scaling Advantages of Resistive Memory Crossbar Based Computation and Its Application to Sparse Coding
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2015.00484
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sapan Agarwal, Tu-Thach Quach, Ojas Parekh, Alexander H. Hsia, Erik P. DeBenedictis, Conrad D. James, Matthew J. Marinella, James B. Aimone

Abstract

The exponential increase in data over the last decade presents a significant challenge to analytics efforts that seek to process and interpret such data for various applications. Neural-inspired computing approaches are being developed in order to leverage the computational properties of the analog, low-power data processing observed in biological systems. Analog resistive memory crossbars can perform a parallel read or a vector-matrix multiplication as well as a parallel write or a rank-1 update with high computational efficiency. For an N × N crossbar, these two kernels can be O(N) more energy efficient than a conventional digital memory-based architecture. If the read operation is noise limited, the energy to read a column can be independent of the crossbar size (O(1)). These two kernels form the basis of many neuromorphic algorithms such as image, text, and speech recognition. For instance, these kernels can be applied to a neural sparse coding algorithm to give an O(N) reduction in energy for the entire algorithm when run with finite precision. Sparse coding is a rich problem with a host of applications including computer vision, object tracking, and more generally unsupervised learning.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
Unknown 64 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 21%
Student > Master 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 11 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 30 45%
Materials Science 11 16%
Physics and Astronomy 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Computer Science 3 4%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 12 18%
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 25 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#9,456
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#295,250
of 400,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#105
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 400,115 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.