Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10535952›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America1999

Odor space and olfactory processing: collective algorithms and neural implementation.

J J Hopfield

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 121 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Optimal compressed sensing strategies for an array of nonlinear olfactory receptor neurons with and without spontaneous activity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Receptor arrays optimized for natural odor statistics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2016
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Intermittency coding in the primary olfactory system: a neural substrate for olfactory scene analysis.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2014
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

J J HopfieldDepartment of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton NJ 08544-1014, USA. hopfield@princeton.edu
Princeton University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several basic olfactory tasks must be solved by highly olfactory animals, including background suppression, multiple object separation, mixture separation, and source identification. The large number N of classes of olfactory receptor cells-hundreds or thousands-permits the use of computational strategies and algorithms that would not be effective in a stimulus space of low dimension. A model of the patterns of olfactory receptor responses, based on the broad distribution of olfactory thresholds, is constructed. Representing one odor from the viewpoint of another then allows a common description of the most important basic problems and shows how to solve them when N is large. One possible biological implementation of these algorithms uses action potential timing and adaptation as the "hardware" features that are responsible for effective neural computation.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsOdorantsOlfactory PathwaysSmell

Identifiers

PMID10535952
PMCPMC22963
OpenAlexW2028462244

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.