How important is weight symmetry in backpropagation?

Gradient backpropagation (BP) requires symmetric feedforward and feedback connections-the same weights must be used for forward and backward passes. This "weight transport problem" (Grossberg 1987) is thought to be one of the main reasons to doubt BP's biologically plausibility. Using 15 different classification datasets, we systematically investigate to what extent BP really depends on weight symmetry. In a study that turned out to be surprisingly similar in spirit to Lillicrap et al.'s demonstration (Lillicrap et al. 2014) but orthogonal in its results, our experiments indicate that: (1) the magnitudes of feedback weights do not matter to performance (2) the signs of feedback weights do matter-the more concordant signs between feedforward and their corresponding feedback connections, the better (3) with feedback weights having random magnitudes and 100% concordant signs, we were able to achieve the same or even better performance than SGD. (4) some normalizations/stabilizations are indispensable for such asymmetric BP to work, namely Batch Normalization (BN) (Ioffe and Szegedy 2015) and/or a "Batch Manhattan" (BM) update rule.National Science Foundation (U.S.) (STC Award CCF 1231216

How Important is Weight Symmetry in Backpropagation?

Gradient backpropagation (BP) requires symmetric feedforward and feedback connections—the same weights must be used for forward and backward passes. This “weight transport problem” [1] is thought to be one of the main reasons of BP’s biological implausibility. Using 15 different classification datasets, we systematically study to what extent BP really depends on weight symmetry. In a study that turned out to be surprisingly similar in spirit to Lillicrap et al.’s demonstration [2] but orthogonal in its results, our experiments indicate that: (1) the magnitudes of feedback weights do not matter to performance (2) the signs of feedback weights do matter—the more concordant signs between feedforward and their corresponding feedback connections, the better (3) with feedback weights having random magnitudes and 100% concordant signs, we were able to achieve the same or even better performance than SGD. (4) some normalizations/stabilizations are indispensable for such asymmetric BP to work, namely Batch Normalization (BN) [3] and/or a “Batch Manhattan” (BM) update rule.This work was supported by the Center for Brains, Minds and Machines (CBMM), funded by NSF STC award CCF - 1231216

Deep supervised learning using local errors

Error backpropagation is a highly effective mechanism for learning high-quality hierarchical features in deep networks. Updating the features or weights in one layer, however, requires waiting for the propagation of error signals from higher layers. Learning using delayed and non-local errors makes it hard to reconcile backpropagation with the learning mechanisms observed in biological neural networks as it requires the neurons to maintain a memory of the input long enough until the higher-layer errors arrive. In this paper, we propose an alternative learning mechanism where errors are generated locally in each layer using fixed, random auxiliary classifiers. Lower layers could thus be trained independently of higher layers and training could either proceed layer by layer, or simultaneously in all layers using local error information. We address biological plausibility concerns such as weight symmetry requirements and show that the proposed learning mechanism based on fixed, broad, and random tuning of each neuron to the classification categories outperforms the biologically-motivated feedback alignment learning technique on the MNIST, CIFAR10, and SVHN datasets, approaching the performance of standard backpropagation. Our approach highlights a potential biological mechanism for the supervised, or task-dependent, learning of feature hierarchies. In addition, we show that it is well suited for learning deep networks in custom hardware where it can drastically reduce memory traffic and data communication overheads