Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Reservoir Computing Generalized

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Generalized reservoir computing relaxes the echo state property by demanding it of the output instead of the reservoir, letting chaotic and oscillatory systems serve as computational resources.

desk verdict The output-ESP idea is real and the demonstrations are convincing, but the paper's universal claim is too strong and is false for phase-modulated reservoirs. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.12104 v1 pith:GQI6PNG2 submitted 2024-11-23 nlin.CD cs.LG

Tomoyuki Kubota , Yusuke Imai , Sumito Tsunegi , Kohei Nakajima This is my paper · ORCID
classification nlin.CDcs.LG
keywords reservoircomputingechostatepropertytime-invarianttransformationphysicalspin-torqueoscillatorspatiotemporalchaosattractorembeddingtemporalinformationprocessingcapacity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Reservoir computing normally requires the physical reservoir to be stable: the same input history must produce the same reservoir state (the echo state property), which rules out oscillatory and chaotic materials. This paper proposes generalized reservoir computing (GRC), which moves that requirement from the reservoir state to the final output: as long as a trained nonlinear readout can turn the time-varying state into a time-invariant function of input history, any dynamical system can serve as a computational resource. The authors demonstrate the idea analytically with a periodic oscillator and a Lissajous knot, numerically with an echo state network whose conditional Lyapunov exponent is positive, and physically with a real spin-torque oscillator. They then show that a chaotic Lorenz 96 system, which fails the echo state property, can emulate targets including the Rossler attractor and the Kuramoto-Sivashinsky spatiotemporal chaos. If correct, GRC removes the main constraint on physical reservoir substrates.

What carries the argument

The central object is the time-invariant (TI) transformation: a nonlinear readout with memory, f(x_t, x_{t-1}, ...), that maps a time-variant reservoir state into a time-invariant output. The paper defines GRC by requiring the echo state property only on the output. The temporal information processing capacity (TIPC) expansion into TI and TV bases (Legendre polynomial chaos plus Fourier/time bases, or Volterra-Wiener-Korenberg series) is used to quantify how much of the state and output is time-invariant and how much depends on time; it is the diagnostic that shows TV states contain latent input memory that a nonlinear readout can expose.

What would settle it

Repeat the Kuramoto-Sivashinsky embedding task with the Lorenz 96 reservoir, training the readout on one initial condition and then running the closed loop from a second initial condition; if the two generated outputs diverge by more than the target's own variance within one Lyapunov time, the claimed TI transformation has not removed the reservoir's time dependence.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that reliable information processing does not require the reservoir itself to be reproducible; it requires the output to be reproducible. Formally, the reservoir state is allowed to be time-variant, x_t = h(t, u_{t-1}, u_{t-2}, ...), and GRC asks only that a readout f (possibly with memory) produce a time-invariant output \hat{y}_t = f(x_t, x_{t-1}, ...) = F(u_{t-1}, u_{t-2}, ...), a function of input history alone. Conventional reservoir computing appears as the special case where the reservoir state is already time-invariant. The paper identifies two mechanisms: removing the time dependence from TV terms (periodic oscillator: $X_t^{2}$ + $Y_t^{2}$ = $r_t^{2}$) and amplifying small TI terms by canceling TV terms (Lissajous knot: -2X_t Y_t + Z_t = \epsilon u_t). It then shows numerically that an ESN without ESP plus a multilayer perceptron can solve NARMA10, and that nonlinear readouts recover memory from Lorenz, Rossler, and a real spin-torque oscillator, where linear readouts recover none. Finally, a chaotic Lorenz 96 reservoir without ESP embeds several target attractors, including the Kuramoto-Sivashinsky model with errors staying small for more than seven Lyapunov times.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's central claim stands on the assumption that for an arbitrary time-variant reservoir there is always a nonlinear readout with memory that makes the output a function only of the input history, and that a finite trained network can find it from finite data.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any physical system that fails the echo state property, such as oscillators, chaotic circuits, or biological networks, becomes a candidate reservoir provided a nonlinear readout with sufficient memory is trained.
  • Real devices such as the spin-torque oscillator can be used without forced synchronization; a trained nonlinear readout retrieves delayed inputs that a linear readout cannot.
  • Spatiotemporally chaotic systems, previously considered unusable, can be embedded as computational substrates: the Lorenz 96 reservoir emulates the Kuramoto-Sivashinsky dynamics with small prediction error for more than seven Lyapunov times.
  • The practical requirement of reservoir computing shifts from finding materials with stable reproducible dynamics to designing or training readouts, including physical readouts such as deep physical neural networks, that perform the TI transformation.
  • Conventional reservoir computing remains valid as the special case where the reservoir state already has ESP; GRC strictly enlarges the class of usable dynamics.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the TI transformation is as general as claimed, the practical bottleneck in physical reservoir computing moves from the substrate to the readout; one testable extension is whether fixed, untrained nonlinear post-processing such as envelope extraction or detrending can substitute for trained MLPs in more time-variant systems.
  • The GRC perspective may apply to biological neural circuits that show trial-to-trial variability: the nonlinear response of downstream circuits could act as the readout, a possibility the paper raises and one could test by recording readout-neuron reliability across repeated sensory stimuli.
  • The paper leaves open the existence conditions for the TI transformation; characterizing the class of TV systems for which a finite-memory readout exists would turn the numerical demonstrations into a general theorem.
  • A practical caution follows implicitly: because the readout must cancel time-dependence, the readout's memory length and nonlinearity likely need to scale with the complexity of the reservoir's unforced dynamics.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes generalized reservoir computing (GRC), in which the echo state property (ESP) is required only of the final output yhat_t, not of the reservoir state x_t, and a nonlinear readout with memory is used as a 'TI transformation' to remove explicit time dependence from a time-variant (TV) reservoir. Two analytically solved examples are given (a periodically oscillating reservoir whose radius encodes the input, and a Lissajous-knot reservoir whose Z-coordinate contains a small input term), followed by numerical demonstrations using an ESN with positive conditional Lyapunov exponent on NARMA10, memory-capacity experiments on the Lorenz and Rössler models and on a real spin-torque oscillator, and attractor-embedding tasks in which a chaotic Lorenz96 reservoir emulates Rössler, Lissajous, and Kuramoto-Sivashinsky targets. The central claim is that any time-variant dynamical system can serve as a computational resource, with conventional RC as a special case.

Significance. The clean analytic examples, the self-contained TIPC derivations in Supplementary S1, and the careful initial-condition checks (node-wise ESP index, global ESP index) are strengths; the real-device spin-torque-oscillator experiment is valuable, and the supplementary material honestly reports where the embedded attractors only approximately match their targets. If the general TI-transformation claim were established, the framework would substantially broaden physical reservoir computing. However, the general existence statement is unproven and, as written, false, so the paper is better understood as a demonstration for a useful class of TV reservoirs than as a general theory of computation with arbitrary time-variant dynamics.

major comments (2)
  1. [TI Transformation] The passage 'The TV state can be transformed into TI outputs by nonlinearity with memory f(xt, xt-1, ...) in general' is the load-bearing premise of the paper, but it is not proven and, as stated, is false. Consider a phase-modulated oscillator with state xt = (cos theta_t, sin theta_t) and theta_{t+1} = theta_t + omega + u_t. For two input histories u and u' with u'_0 = u_0 + 2pi and u'_t = u_t for t >= 1, the observable state trajectories are identical for all t >= 1 because cos and sin are 2pi-periodic, while the memory target u_0 differs by 2pi. Hence no function of the state history, linear or nonlinear, with or without memory, can produce a time-invariant output that correctly distinguishes these two inputs. This is not an exotic case: phase/frequency modulation is a standard physical input pathway, and the paper's analytical examples instead use input acting on non-wrapping coordinates (radius in the periodic oscillator, the Z-coordinate in the Lissajous knot). The paper needs either an explicit observability/input-range condition (for example, phase unwrapping, input range narrower than the wrapping period, or a non-wrapping coordinate) or a reformulation of the central claim as holding for a restricted class of TV systems.
  2. [TI Transformation and Applications] The numerical TI transformation via a trained MLP is presented as covering 'the majority of physical systems,' but no condition is given under which a finite trained readout is guaranteed to find a TI output. The paper's own examples have positive conditional Lyapunov exponents, meaning the reservoir state depends on initial conditions as well as on input history; the demonstrations check a small number of initial conditions and show that the trained readouts are approximately initial-condition independent in those cases, but this does not establish a general mechanism. To make the central claim load-bearing, the authors should either state a sufficient condition for the existence of a TI readout (for example, an output-relevant subspace that is asymptotically independent of initial conditions) or explicitly narrow the claim to systems for which such a readout is demonstrated. As it stands, the abstract's statement that the framework 'removes the limitation' is stronger than the established results.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Supplementary S3] The averaged node-wise ESP index for the reservoir layer is given as 0.96 in the first paragraph of S3 and as 1.7 later in the same section; with the green threshold <0.3, neither value is consistent with the coloring rule described in the caption of Fig. 2c. Please reconcile the numbers and clarify the coloring rule.
  2. [Supplementary S4] The displayed definition of the global ESP index writes MSE(y_i^{(1)}, y_i^{(2)}) in the numerator but then expands it using \hat y^{(1)}_{i,t} and \hat y^{(2)}_i; the first argument should be \hat y^{(1)} and \hat y^{(2)}, and the subscript t is missing on \hat y^{(2)}_i.
  3. [TI Transformation] The general framework is introduced with readout f(xt, xt-1, ...), but the formal GRC definition two paragraphs later uses only \hat y_t = f(xt). Please state explicitly in the definition that the readout may include delayed states.
  4. [Materials and Methods, Memory Capacity Task] The formula for C(\tau) has a mismatched normalization: the NMSE denominator is written as \sum_{t=Ttrain}^{Ttrain+Ttest} y_t^2 while the numerator starts at Ttrain+1; please unify the summation range.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: GRC's construction and demonstrations are self-contained; the TIPC self-citations are analytical tools, not load-bearing premises.

full rationale

The paper's GRC construction is defined by placing the echo-state condition on the output y_hat_t = f(x_t) rather than on the reservoir state, which is a definitional reorganization rather than a circular derivation. The two analytical mechanisms (the oscillator X_t^2 + Y_t^2 = r_t^2 and the Lissajous -2X_t Y_t + Z_t = epsilon u_t) are explicitly constructed and verified by direct algebra, independent of any fitted quantities. The numerical demonstrations train MLP readouts and then evaluate memory functions or TIPC decompositions, often on data with different initial conditions or held-out segments; these are post-hoc measurements of what the trained readouts extract, not predictions derived from fitted parameters renamed as results. Citations [20,33] introduce the TIPC basis and are used as analysis tools; they are not invoked to justify the existence of the TI transformation or to forbid alternatives. No load-bearing step reduces by the paper's own equations to its inputs. The unproven generality of the statement that the TV state can be transformed into TI outputs 'in general' is a correctness limitation, not a circularity, and would be better addressed as a mathematical gap than as a circular derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claim does not rest on fitted numerical constants; the parameters listed are operating points for demonstrations. The serious load-bearing assumptions are the existence and learnability of a time-invariant transformation, and the completeness of the TIPC basis used to measure capacity. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • ESN spectral radius sigma = 1.3
    Chosen so the reservoir has positive MCLE and lacks ESP; demonstration-specific.
  • Lorenz96 (mu, iota) for Rossler embedding = (5, 5)
    Hand-picked operating point that yields positive MCLE (1.18).
  • Lorenz96 (mu, iota) for Lissajous curves embedding = (8, 20)
    Hand-picked operating point that yields positive MCLE (3.67).
  • Lorenz96 (mu, iota) for KS embedding = (5, 15)
    Hand-picked operating point that yields positive MCLE (2.00).
  • Lissajous knot input strength epsilon = 1e-3
    Chosen small to make the TI term weak, illustrating amplification by the readout.
assumptions (4)
  • ad hoc to paper A TI transformation f exists that maps each TV reservoir state h(t, past inputs) to a TI output T(past inputs).
    Stated in the 'TI transformation' section without proof; analytic existence is shown only for toy systems, empirical for others.
  • domain assumption Trained MLP readouts with universal approximation generalize from finite training data to unseen inputs and other initial conditions.
    Relied on in all numerical demonstrations; no statistical or PAC-style guarantees are provided.
  • standard math The TIPC orthogonal bases (Legendre, Fourier, VWK) form a complete expansion for the states considered.
    Needed for the TIPC decompositions used throughout; completeness is assumed from prior work [33,50].
  • domain assumption A positive maximum conditional Lyapunov exponent implies absence of the echo state property for the driven reservoir.
    Standard synchronization result cited to Lu et al. [47]; used to label reservoirs as without ESP.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Reservoir Computing Generalized." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GQI6PNG2

@misc{pith2026241212104,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Reservoir Computing Generalized},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GQI6PNG2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.12104}
}
read the original abstract

A physical neural network (PNN) has both the strong potential to solve machine learning tasks and intrinsic physical properties, such as high-speed computation and energy efficiency. Reservoir computing (RC) is an excellent framework for implementing an information processing system with a dynamical system by attaching a trained readout, thus accelerating the wide use of unconventional materials for a PNN. However, RC requires the dynamics to reproducibly respond to input sequence, which limits the type of substance available for building information processors. Here we propose a novel framework called generalized reservoir computing (GRC) by turning this requirement on its head, making conventional RC a special case. Using substances that do not respond the same to identical inputs (e.g., a real spin-torque oscillator), we propose mechanisms aimed at obtaining a reliable output and show that processed inputs in the unconventional substance are retrievable. Finally, we demonstrate that, based on our framework, spatiotemporal chaos, which is thought to be unusable as a computational resource, can be used to emulate complex nonlinear dynamics, including large scale spatiotemporal chaos. Overall, our framework removes the limitation to building an information processing device and opens a path to constructing a computational system using a wider variety of physical dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.12104 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    R. H. Lee, E. A. Mulder, and J. B. Hopkins, Mechanical neural networks: Architected materials that learn behaviors, Science Robotics 7, eabq7278 (2022). 12

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    A. Ross, N. Leroux, A. De Riz, D. Markovi´ c, D. Sanz-Hern´ andez, J. Trastoy, P. Bortolotti, D. Querlioz, L. Martins, L. Benetti, et al., Multilayer spintronic neural networks with radiofrequency connections, Nature Nanotechnology 18, 1273 (2023)

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Z. Xue, T. Zhou, Z. Xu, S. Yu, Q. Dai, and L. Fang, Fully forward mode training for optical neural networks, Nature 632, 280 (2024)

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    echo state

    H. Jaeger, The “echo state” approach to analysing and training recurrent neural networks-with an erratum note, Bonn, Germany: German National Research Center for Information Technology GMD Technical Report 148, 13 (2001)

    2001

  5. [5]

    Maass, T

    W. Maass, T. Natschl¨ ager, and H. Markram, Real-time computing without stable states: A new framework for neural computation based on perturbations, Neural computation 14, 2531 (2002)

    2002

  6. [6]

    Nakajima and I

    K. Nakajima and I. Fischer, Reservoir Computing (Springer, 2021)

    2021

  7. [7]

    Kaspar, B

    C. Kaspar, B. Ravoo, W. G. van der Wiel, S. Wegner, and W. Pernice, The rise of intelligent matter, Nature 594, 345 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Yasuda, P

    H. Yasuda, P. R. Buskohl, A. Gillman, T. D. Murphey, S. Stepney, R. A. Vaia, and J. R. Raney, Mechanical computing, Nature 598, 39 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Cazettes, L

    F. Cazettes, L. Mazzucato, M. Murakami, J. P. Morais, E. Augusto, A. Renart, and Z. F. Mainen, A reservoir of foraging decision variables in the mouse brain, Nature neuroscience , 1 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    LeCun, Y

    Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, and G. Hinton, Deep learning, nature 521, 436 (2015)

    2015

  3. [11]

    P. A. Merolla, J. V. Arthur, R. Alvarez-Icaza, A. S. Cassidy, J. Sawada, F. Akopyan, B. L. Jackson, N. Imam, C. Guo, Y. Nakamura, et al. , A million spiking-neuron integrated circuit with a scalable communication network and interface, Science 345, 668 (2014)

    2014

  4. [12]

    Prezioso, F

    M. Prezioso, F. Merrikh-Bayat, B. D. Hoskins, G. C. Adam, K. K. Likharev, and D. B. Strukov, Training and operation of an integrated neuromorphic network based on metal-oxide memristors, Nature 521, 61 (2015)

    2015

  5. [13]

    Nakajima, Physical reservoir computing—–an introductory perspective, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics 59, 060501 (2020)

    K. Nakajima, Physical reservoir computing—–an introductory perspective, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics 59, 060501 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    Appeltant, M

    L. Appeltant, M. C. Soriano, G. Van der Sande, J. Danckaert, S. Massar, J. Dambre, B. Schrauwen, C. R. Mirasso, and I. Fischer, Information processing using a single dynamical node as complex system, Nature communications 2, 468 (2011)

    2011

  7. [15]

    C. Du, F. Cai, M. A. Zidan, W. Ma, S. H. Lee, and W. D. Lu, Reservoir computing using dynamic memristors for temporal information processing, Nature communications 8, 2204 (2017)

    2017

  8. [16]

    Zhong, J

    Y. Zhong, J. Tang, X. Li, X. Liang, Z. Liu, Y. Li, Y. Xi, P. Yao, Z. Hao, B. Gao, et al. , A memristor-based analogue reservoir computing system for real-time and power-efficient signal processing, Nature Electronics 5, 672 (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    Fujii and K

    K. Fujii and K. Nakajima, Harnessing disordered-ensemble quantum dynamics for machine learning, Physical Review Applied 8, 024030 (2017)

    2017

  10. [18]

    Ghosh, K

    S. Ghosh, K. Nakajima, T. Krisnanda, K. Fujii, and T. C. Liew, Quantum neuromorphic computing with reservoir com- puting networks, Advanced Quantum Technologies 4, 2100053 (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    Mujal, R

    P. Mujal, R. Mart ´ ınez-Pe˜ na, J. Nokkala, J. Garc ´ ıa-Beni, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, Opportunities in quantum reservoir computing and extreme learning machines, Advanced Quantum Technologies 4, 2100027 (2021)

    2021

  12. [20]

    Kubota, Y

    T. Kubota, Y. Suzuki, S. Kobayashi, Q. H. Tran, N. Yamamoto, and K. Nakajima, Temporal information processing induced by quantum noise, Physical Review Research 5, 023057 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Brunner, M

    D. Brunner, M. C. Soriano, C. R. Mirasso, and I. Fischer, Parallel photonic information processing at gigabyte per second data rates using transient states, Nature communications 4, 1364 (2013)

    2013

  14. [22]

    Larger, M

    L. Larger, M. C. Soriano, D. Brunner, L. Appeltant, J. M. Guti´ errez, L. Pesquera, C. R. Mirasso, and I. Fischer, Photonic information processing beyond turing: an optoelectronic implementation of reservoir computing, Optics express 20, 3241 (2012)

    2012

  15. [23]

    Torrejon, M

    J. Torrejon, M. Riou, F. A. Araujo, S. Tsunegi, G. Khalsa, D. Querlioz, P. Bortolotti, V. Cros, K. Yakushiji, A. Fukushima, et al. , Neuromorphic computing with nanoscale spintronic oscillators, Nature 547, 428 (2017)

    2017

  16. [24]

    Tsunegi, T

    S. Tsunegi, T. Taniguchi, K. Nakajima, S. Miwa, K. Yakushiji, A. Fukushima, S. Yuasa, and H. Kubota, Physical reservoir computing based on spin torque oscillator with forced synchronization, Applied Physics Letters 114 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Tsunegi, T

    S. Tsunegi, T. Kubota, A. Kamimaki, J. Grollier, V. Cros, K. Yakushiji, A. Fukushima, S. Yuasa, H. Kubota, K. Nakajima, et al. , Information processing capacity of spintronic oscillator, Advanced Intelligent Systems 5, 2300175 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Nakajima, T

    K. Nakajima, T. Li, H. Hauser, and R. Pfeifer, Exploiting short-term memory in soft body dynamics as a computational resource, Journal of The Royal Society Interface 11, 20140437 (2014)

    2014

  19. [27]

    Nakajima, H

    K. Nakajima, H. Hauser, T. Li, and R. Pfeifer, Information processing via physical soft body, Scientific reports 5, 10487 (2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    Akashi, Y

    N. Akashi, Y. Kuniyoshi, T. Jo, M. Nishida, R. Sakurai, Y. Wakao, and K. Nakajima, Embedding bifurcations into pneumatic artificial muscle, Advanced Science , 2304402 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    H. Cai, Z. Ao, C. Tian, Z. Wu, H. Liu, J. Tchieu, M. Gu, K. Mackie, and F. Guo, Brain organoid reservoir computing for artificial intelligence, Nature Electronics 6, 1032 (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    T. Sumi, H. Yamamoto, Y. Katori, K. Ito, S. Moriya, T. Konno, S. Sato, and A. Hirano-Iwata, Biological neurons act as generalization filters in reservoir computing, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120, e2217008120 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Ushio, K

    M. Ushio, K. Watanabe, Y. Fukuda, Y. Tokudome, and K. Nakajima, Computational capability of ecological dynamics, Royal Society Open Science 10, 221614 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    Boyd and L

    S. Boyd and L. Chua, Fading memory and the problem of approximating nonlinear operators with volterra series, IEEE Transactions on circuits and systems 32, 1150 (1985). 13

    1985

  25. [33]

    Kubota, H

    T. Kubota, H. Takahashi, and K. Nakajima, Unifying framework for information processing in stochastically driven dy- namical systems, Physical Review Research 3, 043135 (2021)

    2021

  26. [34]

    A. F. Atiya and A. G. Parlos, New results on recurrent network training: unifying the algorithms and accelerating convergence, IEEE transactions on neural networks 11, 697 (2000)

    2000

  27. [35]

    Jaeger, Short term memory in echo state networks , Vol

    H. Jaeger, Short term memory in echo state networks , Vol. 5 (GMD-Forschungszentrum Informationstechnik, 2001)

    2001

  28. [36]

    Kabayama, Y

    T. Kabayama, Y. Kuniyoshi, K. Aihara, and K. Nakajima, Designing chaotic attractors: A semi-supervised approach, arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.09545 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Kuramoto and T

    Y. Kuramoto and T. Tsuzuki, Persistent propagation of concentration waves in dissipative media far from thermal equi- librium, Progress of theoretical physics 55, 356 (1976)

    1976

  30. [38]

    Pathak, B

    J. Pathak, B. Hunt, M. Girvan, Z. Lu, and E. Ott, Model-free prediction of large spatiotemporally chaotic systems from data: A reservoir computing approach, Physical review letters 120, 024102 (2018)

    2018

  31. [39]

    Vandoorne, P

    K. Vandoorne, P. Mechet, T. Van Vaerenbergh, M. Fiers, G. Morthier, D. Verstraeten, B. Schrauwen, J. Dambre, and P. Bienstman, Experimental demonstration of reservoir computing on a silicon photonics chip, Nature communications 5, 3541 (2014)

    2014

  32. [40]

    Larger, A

    L. Larger, A. Bayl´ on-Fuentes, R. Martinenghi, V. S. Udaltsov, Y. K. Chembo, and M. Jacquot, High-speed photonic reservoir computing using a time-delay-based architecture: Million words per second classification, Physical Review X 7, 011015 (2017)

    2017

  33. [41]

    Akashi, Y

    N. Akashi, Y. Kuniyoshi, S. Tsunegi, T. Taniguchi, M. Nishida, R. Sakurai, Y. Wakao, K. Kawashima, and K. Nakajima, A coupled spintronics neuromorphic approach for high-performance reservoir computing, Advanced Intelligent Systems 4, 2200123 (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    L. G. Wright, T. Onodera, M. M. Stein, T. Wang, D. T. Schachter, Z. Hu, and P. L. McMahon, Deep physical neural networks trained with backpropagation, Nature 601, 549 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    Nakajima, K

    M. Nakajima, K. Inoue, K. Tanaka, Y. Kuniyoshi, T. Hashimoto, and K. Nakajima, Physical deep learning with biologically inspired training method: gradient-free approach for physical hardware, Nature Communications 13, 7847 (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    Gallicchio and A

    C. Gallicchio and A. Micheli, Deep reservoir computing. Reservoir Computing: Theory, Physical Implementations, and Applications (Springer, 2021) pp. 77–95

    2021

  37. [45]

    Dambre, D

    J. Dambre, D. Verstraeten, B. Schrauwen, and S. Massar, Information processing capacity of dynamical systems, Scientific reports 2, 514 (2012)

    2012

  38. [46]

    Hornik, M

    K. Hornik, M. Stinchcombe, and H. White, Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators, Neural networks 2, 359 (1989)

    1989

  39. [47]

    Z. Lu, B. R. Hunt, and E. Ott, Attractor reconstruction by machine learning, Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science 28, 061104 (2018)

    2018

  40. [48]

    Bogle, J

    M. Bogle, J. Hearst, V. Jones, and L. Stoilov, Lissajous knots., Journal of Knot Theory & Its Ramifications 3 (1994)

    1994

  41. [49]

    M. T. Rosenstein, J. J. Collins, and C. J. De Luca, A practical method for calculating largest lyapunov exponents from small data sets, Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 65, 117 (1993)

    1993

  42. [50]

    M. J. Korenberg, Identifying nonlinear difference equation and functional expansion representations: the fast orthogonal algorithm, Annals of biomedical engineering 16, 123 (1988)

    1988

  43. [51]

    https://github.com/kubota0130/ipc

  44. [52]

    Shimada and T

    I. Shimada and T. Nagashima, A numerical approach to ergodic problem of dissipative dynamical systems, Progress of theoretical physics 61, 1605 (1979)

    1979

  45. [53]

    C. R. Nelson and C. R. Plosser, Trends and random walks in macroeconmic time series: some evidence and implications, Journal of monetary economics 10, 139 (1982)

    1982

  46. [54]

    Feldman, Hilbert transform in vibration analysis, Mechanical systems and signal processing 25, 735 (2011)

    M. Feldman, Hilbert transform in vibration analysis, Mechanical systems and signal processing 25, 735 (2011)

    2011

  47. [55]

    Integrated Health Care System

    J. Grollier, D. Querlioz, K. Camsari, K. Everschor-Sitte, S. Fukami, and M. D. Stiles, Neuromorphic spintronics, Nature electronics 3, 360 (2020). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This study is supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant No. JP21KK0182 and JP23K18472, by JST CREST Grant No. JPMJCR2014, an...

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.