ENAMeL : a language for binary correlation matrix memories : reducing the memory constraints of matrix memories

Article English OPEN
Burles, Nathan John ; O'Keefe, Simon ; Austin, Jim ; Hobson, Stephen John (2013)
  • Subject: 1712 | 2800 | 1705 | 1702

Despite their relative simplicity, Correlation Matrix Memories (CMMs) are an active area of research, as they are able to be integrated into more complex architectures such as the Associative Rule Chaining Architecture (ARCA) [1]. In this architecture, CMMs are used effectively in order to reduce the time complexity of a tree search from O(bd) to O(d)—where b is the branching factor and d is the depth of the tree. This paper introduces the Extended Neural Associative Memory Language (ENAMeL)—a domain specific language developed to ease development of applications using correlation matrix memories (CMMs). We discuss various considerations required while developing the language, and techniques used to reduce the memory requirements of CMM-based applications. Finally we show that the memory requirements of ARCA when using the ENAMeL interpreter compare favourably to our original results [1] run in MATLAB.
  • References (29)
    29 references, page 1 of 3

    1. Austin J, Hobson S, Burles N, O'Keefe S (2012) A rule chaining architecture using a correlation matrix memory. Int Conf on Artif Neural Netw 2012, pp 49-56. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-33269-2 7

    2. Van Deursen A, Klint P, Visser J (2000) Domain-specific languages: an annotated bibliography. ACM Sigplan Not, pp 26-36. doi: 10.1145/352029.352035

    3. Brewer G (2008) Spiking cellular associative neural networks for pattern recognition. PhD Thesis, University of York

    4. Shanker KPS, Turner A, Sherly E, Austin J (2010) Sequential data mining using correlation matrix memory. Int Conf on Netw and Inf Technol, pp 470-472. doi: 10.1109/ICNIT.2010.5508469

    5. Spinellis D (2001) Notable design patterns for domain-specific languages. J Systems and Software, pp 91-99. doi: 10.1016/S0164-1212(00)00089-3

    6. Mernik M, Heering J, Sloane AM (2005) When and how to develop domain-specific languages. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), pp 316-344. doi: 10.1145/1118890.1118892

    7. Kosar T, Lopez PEM, Barrientos PA, Mernik M (2008) A preliminary study on various implementation approaches of domain-specific language. Information and Software Technology, pp 390-405. doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2007.04.002

    8. Ladd DA, Ramming JC (1994) Two application languages in software production. USENIX Very High Level Languages Symposium Proceeding 1994, pp 169-178.

    9. Van Deursan A, Klint P (1998) Little languages: Little maintenance? J Software Maintenance, pp 75-92. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-908X(199803/04)10:2¡75::AID-SMR168¿3.0.CO;2-5

    10. Kieburtz RB, McKinney L, Bell JM, Hook J, Kotov A, Lewis J, Oliva DP, Sheard T, Smith I, Walton L (1996) A software engineering experiment in software component generation. 18th Int Conf on Software Engineering, pp 542-552.

  • Metrics
    views in OpenAIRE
    views in local repository
    downloads in local repository

    The information is available from the following content providers:

    From Number Of Views Number Of Downloads
    White Rose Research Online - IRUS-UK 0 36
Share - Bookmark