Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Key-value memory in the brain

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that human memory is a key-value store: the hippocampus keeps the addresses (keys), the neocortex keeps the content (values), and forgetting is a retrieval failure, not an erasure.

desk verdict A well-written synthesis that reframes hippocampal indexing as key-value memory; the central anatomical claim is underdetermined, but the paper is honest and deserves serious peer review. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.02950 v2 pith:YJX3VRTH submitted 2025-01-06 q-bio.NC cs.AIcs.LG

Samuel J. Gershman , Ila Fiete , Kazuki Irie This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-bio.NCcs.AIcs.LG
keywords key-valuememoryhippocampalindexingretrievalforgettingassociativetransformerattentionengramscomplementarylearningsystems
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

This paper argues that memory in the brain works the way a key-value store works in computing: experiences are split into two representations, keys that serve as addresses and values that hold content, and recall happens by matching a query to keys and then reading out the associated values. The proposed biological division of labor places keys in the medial temporal lobe (notably the hippocampus) and values in the neocortex. On this view, memories are rarely destroyed; they are stored indelibly and become unavailable because retrieval fails, which is why amnesia can shrink spontaneously and supposedly lost memories can be recovered with the right cues. The paper also argues that keys are optimized for discriminability, values for fidelity, and keys are not open to conscious recall. If this is right, it unifies disparate findings—from hippocampal engrams and cortical reinstatement to tip-of-the-tongue states and machine-learning attention—under one computational principle.

What carries the argument

The central object is the key-value memory, formalized as an association matrix updated by Hebbian outer products, $\Delta M \propto k_n^\top v_n$, and read out as $\hat v = qM$. Rewriting the readout in dual form, $\hat v \propto \sum_n \alpha_n v_n$ with attention weights $\alpha = \sigma(S(K,q))$, shows that any such memory is a soft retrieval over stored values weighted by query-key similarity; choosing different similarity kernels $S(\cdot,\cdot)$ and separation operators $\sigma(\cdot)$ yields Hopfield networks, sparse distributed memory, dense associative memory, linear attention, and transformer self-attention. The identity that carries the argument is that a linear layer trained by gradient descent is exactly a key-value memory, $y = xW_0 + \sum_n \alpha_n v_n$, with keys equal to layer inputs and values equal to error signals. The biology is carried by proposed implementations: Hebbian-like learning rules in the hippocampus for keys, cortical plasticity for values, and fixed random or structured scaffolds (for example, grid-cell-like attractors) that prespecify well-separated addresses.

What would settle it

If a study found that a specific memory could be behaviorally recalled in full detail while its hippocampal engram was optogenetically silenced—or, conversely, that stimulating a hippocampal engram alone reproduced the memory's content without any neocortical reactivation—the proposed division of labor between hippocampal keys and neocortical values would be contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the authors' account, the brain implements a key-value memory system. Each experience is encoded twice: a key vector that functions as a retrievable address, and a value vector that stores the content to be recovered. Retrieval is the soft match between a query and the stored keys, with the final readout a weighted combination of values; this is the same dual-form computation that underlies transformer self-attention, and the authors show that even an ordinary gradient-trained linear layer can be rewritten as a key-value memory whose values are the training errors it experienced. They posit that the hippocampus stores the keys and performs query-key matching, while the neocortex stores the values, with hippocampal 'engram' cells acting as causal indices that reinstate cortical content. This architecture predicts that memory traces are not erased by new learning, that hippocampal keys are shaped to discriminate overlapping experiences (repulsion), and that the keys themselves cannot be consciously recalled, even though they can support feelings of knowing and tip-of-the-tongue judgments. Two toy simulations illustrate the distinctive predictions: keys and values evolve toward different optimal geometries, and a network that has 'forgotten' a first task can recover it by amplifying the first task's stored keys, mirroring optogenetic reactivation of silent engrams.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the hippocampus stores keys (addresses) while the neocortex stores values (content); this anatomical mapping is inferred from correlational evidence such as hippocampal-dependent reinstatement and optogenetic engram studies, and the paper does not directly show that hippocampal representations act purely as addresses rather than as part of the remembered content.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Forgetting is retrieval failure: information is retained but inaccessible, so memory can be restored by improved cues, repeated retrieval attempts, reminder exposures, or direct reactivation of silent engrams.
  • Hippocampal representations should be shaped by discriminability demands, producing repulsion of overlapping experiences, whereas neocortical representations should preserve content fidelity; the paper predicts repulsion effects should be reversible.
  • Metamemory judgments such as feeling of knowing, tip-of-the-tongue states, and change detection without identification can be driven by key-query match alone, without value retrieval.
  • Machine-learning architectures that separate keys from values, including fixed scaffolds, can avoid catastrophic forgetting and show graceful degradation, unlike autoassociative models that mix keys and values.
  • If the hippocampus stores keys, then hippocampal damage should cause overgeneralization and loss of targeted access, with cortical values still intact.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the reversible-forgetting account suggests a clinical direction—memory rehabilitation could target retrieval conditions rather than restorage, for example by designing cues that re-engage the original hippocampal address pattern.
  • Editorial inference: the key-value view predicts that individual differences in metamemory accuracy should track the quality of key-query matching, which could be measured with neural pattern-similarity analyses of hippocampal activity during failed recall.
  • Editorial inference: the fixed-scaffold models imply that learned keys are not always better; choosing the scaffold geometry could be as important as plasticity, a principle that may transfer to continual-learning systems.
  • Editorial inference: if keys are unavailable to conscious recall, representational analyses should find information in hippocampal activity that predicts successful retrieval but is not decodable in explicit report—an untested prediction.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper argues that memory in the brain can be understood as a key-value memory system, with the hippocampus serving as a key/address store and the neocortex as a value/content store. It formalizes key-value memory through correlation matrix memories and the dual form of linear layers, surveys psychological and neural evidence for retrieval-oriented forgetting and for distinct keys and values, and presents two simulations: one showing that key and value representations diverge under optimization, and another showing that amplifying stored keys for a 'forgotten' task can restore performance after continual learning. The authors explicitly label the central anatomical proposal speculative and offer one untested prediction about reversibility of repulsion effects.

Significance. The mathematical core of the paper is correct and clearly presented: the dual-form equivalence for linear layers (Section 2.3, Eqs. 10-11) and the kernel formulation (Section 2.1) usefully connect Hopfield networks, sparse distributed memory, linear attention, and transformer self-attention. The review of behavioral evidence for retrieval-based forgetting is informative, and the public code release is a strength. However, the central claim of a hippocampal-key/neocortical-value division of labor is underdetermined by the evidence cited in Section 4.2, and the supporting simulations are too limited to serve as more than illustrations. The paper is best read as a perspective piece; as a scientific claim it needs a sharper operational criterion and a direct test.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.2] The central anatomical claim—that hippocampal representations are keys and neocortical representations are values—lacks an operational criterion for classifying a neural representation as a key rather than as content. The evidence listed in §4.2 (sparse conjunctive engrams, hippocampal-dependent reinstatement, optogenetic reactivation, Chettih et al.'s food-caching barcodes) is equally compatible with the hippocampus storing the episodic content itself or an index that is itself a form of content; the paper itself notes in §3 that Hopfield networks and the Tolman-Eichenbaum Machine use the same representation as both key and value, and Box 1's Vector-HaSH places keys in the hippocampus while values are reconstructed at the sensory layer. Without a definition that would be violated if hippocampal codes carried content, the proposed division of labor is a reinterpretation of known phenomena rather than a tested hypothesis, and this bears directly on the paper's central claim.
  2. [§5.2, Fig. 3B] The continual-learning simulation is reported as a single trajectory with no error bars or multiple seeds, and the recovery effect is produced by scanning a single scalar β ('optogenetic strength') and selecting a value that improves Task 1 accuracy; this is a post-hoc demonstration rather than a predictive test. The paper also does not specify how β would map onto a real neural intervention or how the result distinguishes retrieval recovery from a generic increase in key-norm magnitude. With one run and a tuned parameter, the simulation does not substantiate the stronger claim that the model 'resonates with' silent engram recovery; it is illustrative only.
  3. [§6] The only explicitly novel falsifiable prediction, that repulsion effects in long-term memory should be reversible, has not been tested and targets the 'keys optimized for discriminability' entailment rather than the anatomical key/value mapping. The authors should either derive a test that would discriminate the hippocampal-keys/neocortical-values division from a content-storing hippocampus, or state plainly that this mapping is a non-exclusive proposal; as written, the central claim is not yet disconfirmable.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typos and spelling inconsistencies, including 'inacessible' in §4.1, 'demantia' in §4.2, the section header 'V alues' in §4.3, 'Consisent' and 'repsectively' in §3 and Box 1, 'Tzyulmankov' in §3, and 'scaler' for 'scalar' in §5.2.
  2. [§5.1, Fig. 2] Figure 2 shows trajectories for a single run without error bars or multiple initializations; the caption should state whether the displayed configuration is representative across seeds and initializations.
  3. [Abstract/Introduction] The abstract and introduction state that the paper presents 'simulations that recapitulate a number of empirical phenomena,' but only two toy simulations are presented; this wording is stronger than what the simulations support and should be tempered.
  4. [Box 1] The box defines the key and value matrices as K = W_top^ad and V = W_ds but does not explain how a reader should reconcile this with the earlier definition of keys as stored address vectors and values as content; a small schematic or verbal explanation would improve accessibility.
  5. [§4.3] The metamemory evidence (feeling of knowing, tip of the tongue, change detection) is consistent with a separate key store but also with partial retrieval of content; adding a discussion of conditions that would distinguish these alternatives would strengthen the section.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central derivation is a review-and-proposal whose formal equivalences are algebraic identities and whose empirical claims rest on independent evidence.

full rationale

The paper's formal chain is not circular. The dual-form identity (Eq. 3) is a mathematical transformation of Eq. 2, and the linear-layer theorem of Irie et al. (Eqs. 10-11) is an algebraic identity that the paper itself sketches; neither reduces to the conclusion by construction. The central anatomical proposal, that the hippocampus stores keys and the neocortex stores values, is advanced as a hypothesis and supported by independent empirical findings (cortical reinstatement, hippocampal-lesion reminder effects, sparse engrams, food-caching barcodes), not by defining the terms so that the claim is true. The simulations are explicitly illustrative: the key/value optimization demo shows a consequence of the architecture, and the β reactivation demo is a post-hoc scaling manipulation rather than a parameter fitted to data or advertised as a prediction. Self-citations are present (Irie et al. 2022; MESH/Vector-HaSH by Fiete and colleagues), but the cited dual-form theorem is checkable algebra and the MESH/Vector-HaSH models are presented as proposed implementations, not as the load-bearing evidence for the hippocampus-as-key-store claim. The paper explicitly labels its connections speculative and offers a genuinely untested prediction (reversibility of repulsion effects). The skeptical concern that the key/value distinction is underdetermined by existing data is a scientific-support or falsifiability issue, not a circular-derivation issue. Accordingly, no circular step meets the evidentiary bar required here.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard kernel theory, a borrowed dual-form theorem, and the domain assumption that forgetting is retrieval failure. No new entities are postulated. The key/value distinction is a representational framing, not an invented mechanism.

free parameters (1)
  • beta (optogenetic strength) = scanned over range, optimal not specified
    In Section 5.2, beta is multiplied onto Task 1 keys; the recovery result is presented as a function of beta, so the effect is conditional on choosing an appropriate value.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Any positive semidefinite kernel can be expressed as an inner product in some vector space
    Used in Section 2.1 to generalize similarity kernels.
  • standard math A linear layer trained by gradient descent is exactly equivalent to a key-value memory (dual form)
    Invoked in Section 2.3 to reinterpret neural networks; proven in Irie et al. 2022, not reproven here.
  • domain assumption Forgetting is primarily retrieval failure rather than erasure
    Central premise of Section 4.1; supported by selective review but not established.
  • domain assumption Hebbian plasticity is a biologically plausible mechanism for key-value association
    Assumed in Section 3 for biological implementation, with caveats.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Key-value memory in the brain." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YJX3VRTH

@misc{pith2026250102950,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Key-value memory in the brain},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YJX3VRTH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.02950}
}
read the original abstract

Classical models of memory in psychology and neuroscience rely on similarity-based retrieval of stored patterns, where similarity is a function of retrieval cues and the stored patterns. While parsimonious, these models do not allow distinct representations for storage and retrieval, despite their distinct computational demands. Key-value memory systems, in contrast, distinguish representations used for storage (values) and those used for retrieval (keys). This allows key-value memory systems to optimize simultaneously for fidelity in storage and discriminability in retrieval. We review the computational foundations of key-value memory, its role in modern machine learning systems, related ideas from psychology and neuroscience, applications to a number of empirical puzzles, and possible biological implementations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.02950 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Two architectures for key-value memory. Black symbols denote vectors and blue sym￾bols denote matrices. (Left) Input x is mapped to key (k), query (q), and value (v) vectors. During memory writing, the weight matrix M is updated using Hebbian learning between the key and value vectors. During reading, the query is projected onto M to produce a retrieved value vˆ. (Right) The input vector is mapped to a hidden layer … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Optimization of key and value representations. Each point represents an event in the memory and belongs to one of (A) two or (B) three classes, represented by different colors. In each case, the evolution of key (Top row) and value (Bottom row) representations during the optimization process is shown; each row shows (Left) Random initialization, (Middle) trajectory of representations during the optimization process,… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Forgetting and reactivation of memory events. A one-layer feedforward neural network is trained on two tasks sequentially, Task 1 and 2, constructed using the MNIST and FashionM￾NIST datasets, respectively. (A) The evolution of the test classification accuracy for the two tasks as a function of training epochs. After epoch 5, the training dataset changes from Task 1 to Task 2; resulting in forgetting of Task 1 as th… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Towards Mechanistically Understanding Why Memorized Knowledge Fails to Generalize in Large Language Model Finetuning

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Memorized facts in fine-tuned LLMs often sit off the mid-layer reasoning path; relocating those representations recovers most multi-hop generalization failures.

  2. Dissociating model architectures from inference computations

    q-bio.NC 2025-07 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    A pretrained transformer shows similar surprisal-decay patterns for linear and exponentially spaced context sampling, suggesting inference-time computations can be separated from model architecture.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

138 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Cue-dependent forgetting

    Endel Tulving. Cue-dependent forgetting. American Scientist, 62:74–82, 1974

    1974

  2. [2]

    Principles of Learning and Memory

    Robert G Crowder. Principles of Learning and Memory. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1976

    1976

  3. [3]

    Psychobiology of active and inactive memory

    Donald J Lewis. Psychobiology of active and inactive memory. Psychological bulletin, 86(5): 1054, 1979

    1979

  4. [4]

    Failures of memory and the fate of forgotten memories

    Ralph R Miller. Failures of memory and the fate of forgotten memories. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 181:107426, 2021

    2021

  5. [5]

    Foundations of Human Memory

    Michael Jacob Kahana. Foundations of Human Memory. Oxford University Press, 2012

    2012

  6. [6]

    Computational principles of memory

    Rishidev Chaudhuri and Ila Fiete. Computational principles of memory. Nature Neuro- science, 19:394–403, 2016

    2016

  7. [7]

    Attention is all you need

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Ł ukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems, volume 30, 2017

    2017

  8. [8]

    Learning to control fast-weight memories: An alternative to dynamic recurrent networks

    Jürgen Schmidhuber. Learning to control fast-weight memories: An alternative to dynamic recurrent networks. Neural Computation, 4(1):131–139, 1992

    1992

Show all 138 references
  1. [9]

    Hybrid computing using a neural network with dynamic external memory

    Alex Graves, Greg Wayne, Malcolm Reynolds, Tim Harley, Ivo Danihelka, Agnieszka Grabska-Barwi ´ nska, Sergio Gómez Colmenarejo, Edward Grefenstette, Tiago Ramalho, John Agapiou, et al. Hybrid computing using a neural network with dynamic external memory. Nature, 538:471–476, 2016

    2016

  2. [10]

    Reinforcement learning and episodic memory in humans and animals: an integrative framework

    Samuel J Gershman and Nathaniel D Daw. Reinforcement learning and episodic memory in humans and animals: an integrative framework. Annual Review of Psychology, 68:101–128, 2017. 17

    2017

  3. [11]

    Transformer feed-forward layers are key-value memories

    Mor Geva, Roei Schuster, Jonathan Berant, and Omer Levy. Transformer feed-forward layers are key-value memories. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 5484–5495, 2021

    2021

  4. [12]

    The dual form of neural networks revisited: Connecting test time predictions to training patterns via spotlights of attention

    Kazuki Irie, Róbert Csordás, and Jürgen Schmidhuber. The dual form of neural networks revisited: Connecting test time predictions to training patterns via spotlights of attention. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 9639–9659. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  5. [13]

    Physics of language models: Part 3.1, knowledge storage and extraction

    Zeyuan Allen-Zhu and Yuanzhi Li. Physics of language models: Part 3.1, knowledge storage and extraction. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024. URL https: //openreview.net/forum?id=5x788rqbcj

    2024

  6. [14]

    Correlation matrix memories

    Teuvo Kohonen. Correlation matrix memories. IEEE transactions on computers, 100:353–359, 1972

    1972

  7. [15]

    Comparison of convolution and matrix distributed memory systems for associa- tive recall and recognition

    Ray Pike. Comparison of convolution and matrix distributed memory systems for associa- tive recall and recognition. Psychological Review, 91:281–294, 1984

    1984

  8. [16]

    Spike timing-dependent plasticity: A hebbian learning rule

    Natalia Caporale and Yang Dan. Spike timing-dependent plasticity: A hebbian learning rule. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 31:25–46, 2008

    2008

  9. [17]

    H-mem: Harnessing synaptic plasticity with hebbian memory networks

    Thomas Limbacher and Robert Legenstein. H-mem: Harnessing synaptic plasticity with hebbian memory networks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 33:21627– 21637, 2020

    2020

  10. [18]

    Karl Steinbuch and Uwe A. W. Piske. Learning matrices and their applications. IEEE Trans- actions on Electronic Computers, 12(6):846–862, 1963

    1963

  11. [19]

    Non- holographic associative memory

    David J Willshaw, O Peter Buneman, and Hugh Christopher Longuet-Higgins. Non- holographic associative memory. Nature, 222(5197):960–962, 1969

    1969

  12. [20]

    Two models for memory organization using interacting traces

    James A Anderson. Two models for memory organization using interacting traces. Mathe- matical Biosciences, 8:137–160, 1970

    1970

  13. [21]

    Learning patterns and pattern sequences by self-organizing nets of threshold elements

    S-I Amari. Learning patterns and pattern sequences by self-organizing nets of threshold elements. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 100:1197–1206, 1972

    1972

  14. [22]

    Associatron-a model of associative memory

    Kaoru Nakano. Associatron-a model of associative memory. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, pages 380–388, 1972

    1972

  15. [23]

    Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computa- tional abilities

    John J Hopfield. Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computa- tional abilities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 79:2554–2558, 1982

    1982

  16. [24]

    Using fast weights to attend to the recent past

    Jimmy Ba, Geoffrey E Hinton, Volodymyr Mnih, Joel Z Leibo, and Catalin Ionescu. Using fast weights to attend to the recent past. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pages 4331–4339, Barcelona, Spain, December 2016

    2016

  17. [25]

    Transform- ers are RNNs: Fast autoregressive transformers with linear attention

    Angelos Katharopoulos, Apoorv Vyas, Nikolaos Pappas, and François Fleuret. Transform- ers are RNNs: Fast autoregressive transformers with linear attention. In Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 119 of Proceedings of Machine Learn- ing ...

    2020

  18. [26]

    Learning with Kernels: Support Vector Machines, Regularization, Optimization, and Beyond

    B Schölkopf. Learning with Kernels: Support Vector Machines, Regularization, Optimization, and Beyond. MIT Press, 2002

    2002

  19. [27]

    Transformer dissection: An unified understanding for transformer’s atten- tion via the lens of kernel

    Yao-Hung Hubert Tsai, Shaojie Bai, Makoto Yamada, Louis-Philippe Morency, and Ruslan Salakhutdinov. Transformer dissection: An unified understanding for transformer’s atten- tion via the lens of kernel. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language ...

    2019 doi

  20. [28]

    Linear transformers are secretly fast weight programmers

    Imanol Schlag, Kazuki Irie, and Jürgen Schmidhuber. Linear transformers are secretly fast weight programmers. In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning , volume 139 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 9355–9366. PMLR, 2021. URL http...

    2021

  21. [29]

    Rethinking atten- tion with performers

    Krzysztof Marcin Choromanski, Valerii Likhosherstov, David Dohan, Xingyou Song, An- dreea Gane, Tamas Sarlos, Peter Hawkins, Jared Quincy Davis, Afroz Mohiuddin, Lukasz Kaiser, David Benjamin Belanger, Lucy J Colwell, and Adrian Weller. Rethinking atten- tion with performers. ...

    2021

  22. [30]

    Random feature attention

    Hao Peng, Nikolaos Pappas, Dani Yogatama, Roy Schwartz, Noah A Smith, and Lingpeng Kong. Random feature attention. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2021

    2021

  23. [31]

    Universal Hopfield networks: A general framework for single-shot associative memory models

    Beren Millidge, Tommaso Salvatori, Yuhang Song, Thomas Lukasiewicz, and Rafal Bogacz. Universal Hopfield networks: A general framework for single-shot associative memory models. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 15561–15583. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  24. [32]

    Sparse Distributed Memory

    Pentti Kanerva. Sparse Distributed Memory. MIT Press, 1988

    1988

  25. [33]

    Hopfield

    Dmitry Krotov and John J. Hopfield. Dense associative memory for pattern recognition. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume 29,

  26. [34]

    Hopfield networks is all you need

    Hubert Ramsauer, Bernhard Schäfl, Johannes Lehner, Philipp Seidl, Michael Widrich, Lukas Gruber, Markus Holzleitner, Thomas Adler, David Kreil, Michael K Kopp, Günter Klam- bauer, Johannes Brandstetter, and Sepp Hochreiter. Hopfield networks is all you need. In International C...

    2021

  27. [35]

    Sparse distributed memory is a continual learner

    Trenton Bricken, Xander Davies, Deepak Singh, Dmitry Krotov, and Gabriel Kreiman. Sparse distributed memory is a continual learner. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=JknGeelZJpHP

    2023

  28. [36]

    End-to-end memory networks

    Sainbayar Sukhbaatar, Arthur Szlam, Jason Weston, and Rob Fergus. End-to-end memory networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume 28. Curran Asso- ciates, Inc., 2015. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2015/file/ 8fb21ee7a2207526da55...

    2015

  29. [37]

    Key-value memory networks for directly reading documents

    Alexander Miller, Adam Fisch, Jesse Dodge, Amir-Hossein Karimi, Antoine Bordes, and Jason Weston. Key-value memory networks for directly reading documents. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages 1400–1409, 2016

    2016

  30. [38]

    Content-Addressable Memories

    Teuvo Kohonen. Content-Addressable Memories. Springer Science & Business Media, 1980

    1980

  31. [39]

    Memory without organization: Properties of a model with random storage and undirected retrieval

    Thomas K Landauer. Memory without organization: Properties of a model with random storage and undirected retrieval. Cognitive Psychology, 7:495–531, 1975

    1975

  32. [40]

    Statistical theory of spontaneous recovery and regression

    WK Estes. Statistical theory of spontaneous recovery and regression. Psychological Review, 62:145–154, 1955

    1955

  33. [41]

    Theoretical foundations of the potential function method in pattern recognition learning

    MA Aizerman, EM Braverman, and LI Rozonoer. Theoretical foundations of the potential function method in pattern recognition learning. Automation and Remote Control, 25:821–837, 1964

    1964

  34. [42]

    Surprise as a factor in the von Restorff effect

    RT Green. Surprise as a factor in the von Restorff effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52:340–344, 1956

    1956

  35. [43]

    An investigation of paradoxical memory effects

    Elliot Hirshman, M Margaret Whelley, and Michael Palij. An investigation of paradoxical memory effects. Journal of Memory and Language, 28:594–609, 1989

    1989

  36. [44]

    Schematic influences on category learning and recognition memory

    Yasuaki Sakamoto and Bradley C Love. Schematic influences on category learning and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133:534–553, 2004

    2004

  37. [45]

    Dissociable effects of surprising rewards on learning and memory

    N Rouhani, KA Norman, and Y Niv. Dissociable effects of surprising rewards on learning and memory. Journal of Experimental psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 44:1430– 1443, 2018

    2018

  38. [46]

    Mnemonic prediction errors promote de- tailed memories

    Oded Bein, Natalie A Plotkin, and Lila Davachi. Mnemonic prediction errors promote de- tailed memories. Learning & Memory, 28:422–434, 2021

    2021

  39. [47]

    Backpropagation and the brain

    Timothy P Lillicrap, Adam Santoro, Luke Marris, Colin J Akerman, and Geoffrey Hinton. Backpropagation and the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 21:335–346, 2020

    2020

  40. [48]

    Building transformers from neu- rons and astrocytes

    Leo Kozachkov, Ksenia V Kastanenka, and Dmitry Krotov. Building transformers from neu- rons and astrocytes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120:e2219150120, 2023

    2023

  41. [49]

    Bio- logical learning in key-value memory networks

    Danil Tyulmankov, Ching Fang, Annapurna Vadaparty, and Guangyu Robert Yang. Bio- logical learning in key-value memory networks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34:22247–22258, 2021

    2021

  42. [50]

    Behavioral time scale synaptic plasticity underlies ca1 place fields

    Katie C Bittner, Aaron D Milstein, Christine Grienberger, Sandro Romani, and Jeffrey C Magee. Behavioral time scale synaptic plasticity underlies ca1 place fields. Science, 357: 1033–1036, 2017

    2017

  43. [51]

    James C. R. Whittington, Joseph Warren, and Tim E.J. Behrens. Relating transformers to models and neural representations of the hippocampal formation. InInternational Conference on Learning Representations, 2022. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=B8DVo9B1YE0. 20

    2022

  44. [52]

    The Tolman-Eichenbaum machine: unifying space and relational memory through generalization in the hippocampal formation

    James CR Whittington, Timothy H Muller, Shirley Mark, Guifen Chen, Caswell Barry, Neil Burgess, and Timothy EJ Behrens. The Tolman-Eichenbaum machine: unifying space and relational memory through generalization in the hippocampal formation. Cell, 183:1249– 1263, 2020

    2020

  45. [53]

    Mi- crostructure of a spatial map in the entorhinal cortex

    Torkel Hafting, Marianne Fyhn, Sturla Molden, May-Britt Moser, and Edvard I Moser. Mi- crostructure of a spatial map in the entorhinal cortex. Nature, 436:801–806, 2005

    2005

  46. [54]

    Learning to encode po- sition for transformer with continuous dynamical model

    Xuanqing Liu, Hsiang-Fu Yu, Inderjit Dhillon, and Cho-Jui Hsieh. Learning to encode po- sition for transformer with continuous dynamical model. In International Conference on Ma- chine Learning, pages 6327–6335. PMLR, 2020

    2020

  47. [55]

    Episodic and asso- ciative memory from spatial scaffolds in the hippocampus

    Sarthak Chandra, Sugandha Sharma, Rishidev Chaudhuri, and Ila Fiete. Episodic and asso- ciative memory from spatial scaffolds in the hippocampus. Nature, pages 1–13, 2025

    2025

  48. [56]

    Content addressable memory without catastrophic forgetting by heteroassociation with a fixed scaffold

    Sugandha Sharma, Sarthak Chandra, and Ila Fiete. Content addressable memory without catastrophic forgetting by heteroassociation with a fixed scaffold. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 19658–19682. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  49. [57]

    Specific evidence of low-dimensional continuous attractor dynamics in grid cells

    KiJung Yoon, Michael A Buice, Caswell Barry, Robin Hayman, Neil Burgess, and Ila R Fiete. Specific evidence of low-dimensional continuous attractor dynamics in grid cells. Nature Neuroscience, 16:1077–1084, 2013

    2013

  50. [58]

    Correlation structure of grid cells is preserved during sleep

    Richard J Gardner, Li Lu, Tanja Wernle, May-Britt Moser, and Edvard I Moser. Correlation structure of grid cells is preserved during sleep. Nature Neuroscience, 22:598–608, 2019

    2019

  51. [59]

    Grid cell co- activity patterns during sleep reflect spatial overlap of grid fields during active behaviors

    Sean G Trettel, John B Trimper, Ernie Hwaun, Ila R Fiete, and Laura Lee Colgin. Grid cell co- activity patterns during sleep reflect spatial overlap of grid fields during active behaviors. Nature Neuroscience, 22:609–617, 2019

    2019

  52. [60]

    Toroidal topology of population activity in grid cells

    Richard J Gardner, Erik Hermansen, Marius Pachitariu, Yoram Burak, Nils A Baas, Ben- jamin A Dunn, May-Britt Moser, and Edvard I Moser. Toroidal topology of population activity in grid cells. Nature, 602:123–128, 2022

    2022

  53. [61]

    Organizing concep- tual knowledge in humans with a gridlike code

    Alexandra O Constantinescu, Jill X O’Reilly, and Timothy EJ Behrens. Organizing concep- tual knowledge in humans with a gridlike code. Science, 352:1464–1468, 2016

    2016

  54. [62]

    Mapping of a non-spatial dimension by the hippocampal–entorhinal circuit

    Dmitriy Aronov, Rhino Nevers, and David W Tank. Mapping of a non-spatial dimension by the hippocampal–entorhinal circuit. Nature, 543:719–722, 2017

    2017

  55. [63]

    A map of visual space in the primate entorhinal cortex

    Nathaniel J Killian, Michael J Jutras, and Elizabeth A Buffalo. A map of visual space in the primate entorhinal cortex. Nature, 491:761–764, 2012

    2012

  56. [64]

    Statistical mechanics of neural net- works near saturation

    Daniel J Amit, Hanoch Gutfreund, and H Sompolinsky. Statistical mechanics of neural net- works near saturation. Annals of Physics, 173:30–67, 1987

    1987

  57. [65]

    Catastrophic interference in connectionist networks: The sequential learning problem

    Michael McCloskey and Neal J Cohen. Catastrophic interference in connectionist networks: The sequential learning problem. In Psychology of Learning and Motivation, volume 24, pages 109–165. Elsevier, 1989. 21

    1989

  58. [66]

    “fate”’ of first-list associations in transfer theory

    Jean M Barnes and Benton J Underwood. “fate”’ of first-list associations in transfer theory. Journal of experimental psychology, 58:97–105, 1959

    1959

  59. [67]

    Overparameterized neural networks implement associative memory

    Adityanarayanan Radhakrishnan, Mikhail Belkin, and Caroline Uhler. Overparameterized neural networks implement associative memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences, 117:27162–27170, 2020

    2020

  60. [68]

    How big is human memory, or on being just useful enough

    Y Dudai. How big is human memory, or on being just useful enough. Learning & Memory, 3:341–365, 1997

    1997

  61. [69]

    Fifty years of memory for names and faces: A cross-sectional approach

    HP Bahrick, PO Bahrick, and RP Wittlinger. Fifty years of memory for names and faces: A cross-sectional approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104:54–75, 1975

    1975

  62. [70]

    Lifetime maintenance of high school mathematics con- tent

    Harry P Bahrick and Lynda K Hall. Lifetime maintenance of high school mathematics con- tent. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120:20–33, 1991

    1991

  63. [71]

    On the very long-term retention of knowledge acquired through formal education: Twelve years of cognitive psychology

    Martin A Conway, Gillian Cohen, and Nicola Stanhope. On the very long-term retention of knowledge acquired through formal education: Twelve years of cognitive psychology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120:395–409, 1991

    1991

  64. [72]

    Two case studies of very long-term retention

    Ashleigh M Maxcey, Richard M Shiffrin, Denis Cousineau, and Richard C Atkinson. Two case studies of very long-term retention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, pages 1–5, 2021

    2021

  65. [73]

    Forgetting: Trace erosion or retrieval failure? Science, 168:1601–1603, 1970

    Richard M Shiffrin. Forgetting: Trace erosion or retrieval failure? Science, 168:1601–1603, 1970

    1970

  66. [74]

    Dissociating memory accessibility and precision in forgetting

    Sam C Berens, Blake A Richards, and Aidan J Horner. Dissociating memory accessibility and precision in forgetting. Nature Human Behaviour, 4:866–877, 2020

    2020

  67. [75]

    The truth is out there: Accuracy in recall of verifiable real-world events

    Nicholas B Diamond, Michael J Armson, and Brian Levine. The truth is out there: Accuracy in recall of verifiable real-world events. Psychological Science, 31:1544–1556, 2020

    2020

  68. [76]

    My memory: A study of autobiographical memory over six years

    Willem A Wagenaar. My memory: A study of autobiographical memory over six years. Cognitive Psychology, 18:225–252, 1986

    1986

  69. [77]

    Spontaneous remembering after recall failure

    Herman Buschke. Spontaneous remembering after recall failure. Science, 184:579–581, 1974

    1974

  70. [78]

    The role of recall time in producing hypermnesia

    HL Roediger and LA Thorpe. The role of recall time in producing hypermnesia. Memory & Cognition, 6:296–305, 1978

    1978

  71. [79]

    Hypermnesia and reminiscence in recall: a historical and empirical review

    DG Payne. Hypermnesia and reminiscence in recall: a historical and empirical review. Psy- chological Bulletin, 101:5–27, 1987

    1987

  72. [80]

    Syndromes of retrograde amnesia: a conceptual and empirical synthesis

    N Kapur. Syndromes of retrograde amnesia: a conceptual and empirical synthesis. Psycho- logical Bulletin, 125:800–825, 1999

    1999

  73. [81]

    Recovery of memory following amnesia

    Donald J Lewis, James R Misanin, and Ralph R Miller. Recovery of memory following amnesia. Nature, 220(5168):704–705, 1968

    1968

  74. [82]

    The status of memory following experimentally in- duced amnesias: Gone, but not forgotten

    David C Riccio and Rick Richardson. The status of memory following experimentally in- duced amnesias: Gone, but not forgotten. Physiological Psychology, 12:59–72, 1984. 22

    1984

  75. [83]

    Stages of memory in mice treated with acetoxy- cycloheximide before or immediately after learning

    LB Flexner, JB Flexner, and RB Roberts. Stages of memory in mice treated with acetoxy- cycloheximide before or immediately after learning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 56:730–735, 1966

    1966

  76. [84]

    Acetoxycycloheximide and transient amnesia in the rat

    Roger G Serota. Acetoxycycloheximide and transient amnesia in the rat. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 68:1249–1250, 1971

    1971

  77. [85]

    Variable decay of memory and its recovery in cycloheximide-treated mice

    Larry R Squire and Samuel H Barondes. Variable decay of memory and its recovery in cycloheximide-treated mice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 69:1416–1420, 1972

    1972

  78. [86]

    State-dependent recall can be induced by protein synthesis inhibition: behavioural and morphological observations

    PM Bradley and KM Galal. State-dependent recall can be induced by protein synthesis inhibition: behavioural and morphological observations. Developmental Brain Research, 40: 243–251, 1988

    1988

  79. [87]

    Reexposure to the amnestic agent alleviates cycloheximide-induced retrograde amnesia for reactivated and extinction memories

    James F Briggs and Brian P Olson. Reexposure to the amnestic agent alleviates cycloheximide-induced retrograde amnesia for reactivated and extinction memories. Learn- ing & Memory, 20:285–288, 2013

    2013

  80. [88]

    Pascale Gisquet-Verrier, Joseph F Lynch, Pasquale Cutolo, Daniel Toledano, Adam Ulmen, Aaron M Jasnow, and David C Riccio. Integration of new information with active memory accounts for retrograde amnesia: a challenge to the consolidation/reconsolidation hypoth- esis? Journal ...

    2015

  81. [89]

    Conditioned Reflexes

    IP Pavlov. Conditioned Reflexes. Oxford University Press, 1927

    1927

  82. [90]

    Reinstatement of fear to an extinguished conditioned stimulus

    RA Rescorla and CD Heth. Reinstatement of fear to an extinguished conditioned stimulus. Journal of Experimental psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 1:88–96, 1975

    1975

  83. [91]

    Why there are complementary learn- ing systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory

    JL McClelland, BL McNaughton, and RC O’Reilly. Why there are complementary learn- ing systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory. Psychological Review, 102:419–457, 1995

    1995

  84. [92]

    Hippocampal and neocortical contributions to memory: Advances in the complementary learning systems framework

    Randall C O’Reilly and Kenneth A Norman. Hippocampal and neocortical contributions to memory: Advances in the complementary learning systems framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(12):505–510, 2002

    2002

  85. [93]

    What learning systems do intelligent agents need? complementary learning systems theory updated

    Dharshan Kumaran, Demis Hassabis, and James L McClelland. What learning systems do intelligent agents need? complementary learning systems theory updated. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20:512–534, 2016

    2016

  86. [94]

    Episodic memory: new insights from the study of semantic dementia

    Kim S Graham, Karalyn Patterson, and John R Hodges. Episodic memory: new insights from the study of semantic dementia. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 9:245–250, 1999

    1999

  87. [95]

    Episodic reinstatement in the medial temporal lobe

    Bernhard P Staresina, Richard NA Henson, Nikolaus Kriegeskorte, and Arjen Alink. Episodic reinstatement in the medial temporal lobe. Journal of Neuroscience, 32:18150–18156, 2012

    2012

  88. [96]

    Reinstate- ment of associative memories in early visual cortex is signaled by the hippocampus

    Sander E Bosch, Janneke FM Jehee, Guillén Fernández, and Christian F Doeller. Reinstate- ment of associative memories in early visual cortex is signaled by the hippocampus. Journal of Neuroscience, 34:7493–7500, 2014. 23

    2014

  89. [97]

    Cortical representations are reinstated by the hippocampus dur- ing memory retrieval

    Kazumasa Z Tanaka, Aleksandr Pevzner, Anahita B Hamidi, Yuki Nakazawa, Jalina Gra- ham, and Brian J Wiltgen. Cortical representations are reinstated by the hippocampus dur- ing memory retrieval. Neuron, 84:347–354, 2014

    2014

  90. [98]

    Trial-by-trial hippocampal encoding activation predicts the fidelity of cortical reinstatement during subsequent retrieval.Cerebral Cortex, 27:3515–3524, 2017

    Jared F Danker, Alexa Tompary, and Lila Davachi. Trial-by-trial hippocampal encoding activation predicts the fidelity of cortical reinstatement during subsequent retrieval.Cerebral Cortex, 27:3515–3524, 2017

    2017

  91. [99]

    Coordinated representa- tional reinstatement in the human hippocampus and lateral temporal cortex during episodic memory retrieval

    D Pacheco Estefan, Martí Sánchez-Fibla, Armin Duff, Alessandro Principe, Rodrigo Ro- camora, Hui Zhang, Nikolai Axmacher, and Paul FMJ Verschure. Coordinated representa- tional reinstatement in the human hippocampus and lateral temporal cortex during episodic memory retrieval....

    2019

  92. [100]

    Enhanced reinstatement of naturalistic event memories due to hippocampal-network-targeted stimulation

    Melissa Hebscher, James E Kragel, Thorsten Kahnt, and Joel L Voss. Enhanced reinstatement of naturalistic event memories due to hippocampal-network-targeted stimulation. Current Biology, 31:1428–1437, 2021

    2021

  93. [101]

    Changes in context-specificity during memory reconsolidation: selective effects of hip- pocampal lesions

    Gordon Winocur, Paul W Frankland, Melanie Sekeres, Stuart Fogel, and Morris Moscov- itch. Changes in context-specificity during memory reconsolidation: selective effects of hip- pocampal lesions. Learning & Memory, 16:722–729, 2009

    2009

  94. [102]

    The hippocampus plays a selective role in the retrieval of detailed contextual memories

    Brian J Wiltgen, Miou Zhou, Ying Cai, J Balaji, Mikael Guzman Karlsson, Sherveen N Pari- vash, Weidong Li, and Alcino J Silva. The hippocampus plays a selective role in the retrieval of detailed contextual memories. Current Biology, 20:1336–1344, 2010

    2010

  95. [103]

    The hippocampal memory indexing theory

    TJ Teyler and P DiScenna. The hippocampal memory indexing theory. Behavioral Neuro- science, 100:147–154, 1986

    1986

  96. [104]

    The hippocampal indexing theory and episodic mem- ory: updating the index

    Timothy J Teyler and Jerry W Rudy. The hippocampal indexing theory and episodic mem- ory: updating the index. Hippocampus, 17:1158–1169, 2007

    2007

  97. [105]

    An integrated index: engrams, place cells, and hippocampal memory

    Travis D Goode, Kazumasa Z Tanaka, Amar Sahay, and Thomas J McHugh. An integrated index: engrams, place cells, and hippocampal memory. Neuron, 107:805–820, 2020

    2020

  98. [106]

    Optogenetic stimulation of a hippocampal engram activates fear memory recall

    Xu Liu, Steve Ramirez, Petti T Pang, Corey B Puryear, Arvind Govindarajan, Karl Deis- seroth, and Susumu Tonegawa. Optogenetic stimulation of a hippocampal engram activates fear memory recall. Nature, 484:381–385, 2012

    2012

  99. [107]

    Creating a false memory in the hippocampus

    Steve Ramirez, Xu Liu, Pei-Ann Lin, Junghyup Suh, Michele Pignatelli, Roger L Redondo, Tomás J Ryan, and Susumu Tonegawa. Creating a false memory in the hippocampus. Sci- ence, 341:387–391, 2013

    2013

  100. [108]

    Chemogenetic interrogation of a brain-wide fear memory network in mice

    Gisella Vetere, Justin W Kenney, Lina M Tran, Frances Xia, Patrick E Steadman, John Parkin- son, Sheena A Josselyn, and Paul W Frankland. Chemogenetic interrogation of a brain-wide fear memory network in mice. Neuron, 94:363–374, 2017

    2017

  101. [109]

    Brain-wide mapping re- veals that engrams for a single memory are distributed across multiple brain regions.Nature Communications, 13:1799, 2022

    Dheeraj S Roy, Young-Gyun Park, Minyoung E Kim, Ying Zhang, Sachie K Ogawa, Nicholas DiNapoli, Xinyi Gu, Jae H Cho, Heejin Choi, Lee Kamentsky, et al. Brain-wide mapping re- veals that engrams for a single memory are distributed across multiple brain regions.Nature Communicati...

    2022

  102. [110]

    The hippocampus: hub of brain network communication for memory

    Francesco P Battaglia, Karim Benchenane, Anton Sirota, Cyriel MA Pennartz, and Sidney I Wiener. The hippocampus: hub of brain network communication for memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(7):310–318, 2011

    2011

  103. [111]

    Barcoding of episodic memories in the hippocampus of a food-caching bird

    Selmaan N Chettih, Emily L Mackevicius, Stephanie Hale, and Dmitriy Aronov. Barcoding of episodic memories in the hippocampus of a food-caching bird. Cell, 187:1922–1935, 2024

    1922

  104. [112]

    Overlap among spatial memories triggers repulsion of hippocampal representations

    Avi JH Chanales, Ashima Oza, Serra E Favila, and Brice A Kuhl. Overlap among spatial memories triggers repulsion of hippocampal representations. Current Biology, 27:2307–2317, 2017

    2017

  105. [113]

    Abrupt hippocampal remapping signals resolution of memory interference.Nature Communications, 12:4816, 2021

    Guo Wanjia, Serra E Favila, Ghootae Kim, Robert J Molitor, and Brice A Kuhl. Abrupt hippocampal remapping signals resolution of memory interference.Nature Communications, 12:4816, 2021

    2021

  106. [114]

    The mechanisms for pattern completion and pattern separation in the hippocampus

    Edmund T Rolls. The mechanisms for pattern completion and pattern separation in the hippocampus. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 7:74, 2013

    2013

  107. [115]

    tip of the tongue

    Roger Brown and David McNeill. The “tip of the tongue”’ phenomenon. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5:325–337, 1966

    1966

  108. [116]

    A review of the tip-of-the-tongue experience

    AS Brown. A review of the tip-of-the-tongue experience. Psychological Bulletin, 109:204–223, 1991

    1991

  109. [117]

    Memory and the feeling-of-knowing experience

    JT Hart. Memory and the feeling-of-knowing experience. Journal of Educational Psychology, 56:208–216, 1965

    1965

  110. [118]

    tip-of-the-tongue

    JL Freedman and TK Landauer. Retrieval of long-term memory: “tip-of-the-tongue”’ phe- nomenon. Psychonomic Science, 4:309–310, 1966

    1966

  111. [119]

    ‘feeling of knowing’ and cued recall

    Michael M Gruneberg and Joseph Monks. ‘feeling of knowing’ and cued recall. Acta Psy- chologica, 38:257–265, 1974

    1974

  112. [120]

    Strategy selection in question answering

    Lynne M Reder. Strategy selection in question answering. Cognitive Psychology, 19:90–138, 1987

    1987

  113. [121]

    What determines initial feeling of knowing? familiar- ity with question terms, not with the answer

    Lynne M Reder and Frank E Ritter. What determines initial feeling of knowing? familiar- ity with question terms, not with the answer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18:435–451, 1992

    1992

  114. [122]

    Cue familiarity but not target retrievability enhances feeling- of-knowing judgments

    BL Schwartz and J Metcalfe. Cue familiarity but not target retrievability enhances feeling- of-knowing judgments. Journal of Experimental psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 18:1074–1083, 1992

    1992

  115. [123]

    A study of memory pointers

    Asher Koriat and Israel Lieblich. A study of memory pointers. Acta Psychologica, 41:151–164, 1977

    1977

  116. [124]

    Headed records: A model for memory and its failures

    John Morton, Richard H Hammersley, and DA Bekerian. Headed records: A model for memory and its failures. Cognition, 20:1–23, 1985. 25

    1985

  117. [125]

    Working mem- ory retention systems: A state of activated long-term memory

    Daniel S Ruchkin, Jordan Grafman, Katherine Cameron, and Rita S Berndt. Working mem- ory retention systems: A state of activated long-term memory. Behavioral and Brain sciences, 26:709–728, 2003

    2003

  118. [126]

    Short-term memory and long-term memory are still different

    D Norris. Short-term memory and long-term memory are still different. Psychological Bul- letin, 143:992–1009, 2017

    2017

  119. [127]

    Change detection on a hunch: Pre-attentive vision allows “sensing”’ of unique feature changes

    Felix Ball and Niko A Busch. Change detection on a hunch: Pre-attentive vision allows “sensing”’ of unique feature changes. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics , 77:2570–2588, 2015

    2015

  120. [128]

    Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence

    George Mandler. Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence. Psychological Review, 87:252–271, 1980

    1980

  121. [129]

    Engram cells retain memory under retrograde amnesia

    Tomás J Ryan, Dheeraj S Roy, Michele Pignatelli, Autumn Arons, and Susumu Tonegawa. Engram cells retain memory under retrograde amnesia. Science, 348(6238):1007–1013, 2015

    2015

  122. [130]

    Silent memory engrams as the basis for retrograde amnesia

    Dheeraj S Roy, Shruti Muralidhar, Lillian M Smith, and Susumu Tonegawa. Silent memory engrams as the basis for retrograde amnesia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(46):E9972–E9979, 2017

    2017

  123. [131]

    The MNIST database of hand- written digits

    Yann LeCun, Corinna Cortes, and Christopher JC Burges. The MNIST database of hand- written digits. URL https://ossci-datasets.s3.amazonaws.com/mnist, 1998

    1998

  124. [132]

    Fashion-MNIST: a novel image dataset for benchmarking machine learning algorithms

    Han Xiao, Kashif Rasul, and Roland Vollgraf. Fashion-MNIST: a novel image dataset for benchmarking machine learning algorithms. Preprint arXiv:1708.07747, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  125. [133]

    Connectionist models of recognition memory: constraints imposed by learn- ing and forgetting functions

    Roger Ratcliff. Connectionist models of recognition memory: constraints imposed by learn- ing and forgetting functions. Psychological review, 97(2):285, 1990

    1990

  126. [134]

    Catastrophic forgetting in connectionist networks

    Robert M French. Catastrophic forgetting in connectionist networks. Trends in cognitive sciences, 3(4):128–135, 1999

    1999

  127. [135]

    What have we learned about artificial intelligence from studying the brain? Biological Cybernetics, pages 1–5, 2024

    Samuel J Gershman. What have we learned about artificial intelligence from studying the brain? Biological Cybernetics, pages 1–5, 2024

    2024

  128. [136]

    Yang, Zachary DeVito, Martin Raison, Alykhan Tejani, Sasank Chil- amkurthy, Benoit Steiner, Lu Fang, Junjie Bai, and Soumith Chintala

    Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zeming Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, Alban Desmaison, Andreas Köpf, Edward Z. Yang, Zachary DeVito, Martin Raison, Alykhan Tejani, Sasank Chil- amkurthy, Benoit Steiner...

    2019

  129. [137]

    Kingma and Jimmy Ba

    Diederik P . Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. In Inter- national Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), San Diego, CA, USA, May 2015. 26 STAR ⋆ METHODS KEY RESOURCES TABLE RESOURCE SOURCE IDENTIFIER Data MNIST LeCun et al. 131 https://os...

    2015

  130. [2016]

    URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2016/file/ eaae339c4d89fc102edd9dbdb6a28915-Paper.pdf

    2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.