Talk:Cellular neural network
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
[Untitled][edit]
Whoever first wrote the bulk of this article probably didn't have English as their first language. Can an expert please rewrite this to be less ambiguous and easier to follow? Also why is the reference list longer than the entire article? (unsigned comment)
I also want to say that the whole article needs "citation needed" after just about every sentence.
From reading the description here, it seems that CNNs are not distinct from ANNs (as stated several times) but are rather just a special case of ANNs. (Nothing about being an ANN requires non-local connections, and as far as I can tell from the description here, the only difference is that CNNs are required to have a specific local graph structure.)
- CNN is indeed a kind of ANN with local connections only. The article is not explicit in this regard, not clear why. Arkadi kagan (talk) 12:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
The acronym "CA" seems to be used quite confusingly as well. Sometimes it seems to refer to "continuous automaton", but sometimes it seems to mean "cellular automaton", especially when CNNs are being contrasted with CAs.
All in all, this page is somewhat confusing, and it's not clear why this topic deserves a separate article from neural networks. However, at the moment it's probably good that this is separate, since this article is actually less confusing than the articles neural network and artificial neural network, which have the added complication of being nearly totally redundant with one another. 120.16.58.115 (talk) 04:43, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
[RE:Untitled][edit]
Please note that the concerns listed are understood and have been heeded by way of a pass through the article as it was (with revision to the sections with obvious non-native English issues and a link to 'The Chua Lectures: A 12-Part Series with Hewlett Packard Labs'); while the concern regarding citations is duly noted the references list is quite long, and the topic esoteric enough, that no one will start a riot if it takes some time before the page is a model example for Wikipedia authorship. Further, as Cellular Neural Networks (really Cellular Nonlinear Networks) were theorized to exist as many as 50 years ago the idea of their having a separate page from ANNs is not unreasonable; as they are a realization of a kind of Cellular Automata they should also be distinct in that sense as well (just as stochastic modeling and MCMC would have their own respective pages).
If anyone has any ideas as to how the article should be restructured/reorganized to accommodate the desire for citations please feel free to append a comment to this Talk page... idfubar (talk) 06:16, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
AnaLogic Computers?[edit]
The article mentions a company, AnaLogic Computers, in the present tense but I can find no trace today of a company of that name producing chips (there's a UK computer repair company with the same name but it does not appear to be related). Can anyone say what became of the original company, please? p.r.newman (talk) 18:25, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
AnaFocus was acquired[edit]
According to [1] AnaFocus (and supposedly AnaLogic along with it) was acquired by e2v technologies in 2014. With a quick search, I found an article on AnaLogic from 2003. [2] There are probably more but these are from years ago.
As the main focus of this article is Cellular neural nets rather than an acquired company, I'm going to make some fixes to that section on AnaFocus. Mattias Sjoberg (talk) 07:07, 27 December 2020 (UTC)