Redistribution of Synaptic Efficacy Supports Stable Pattern Learning in Neural Networks

Markram and Tsodyks, by showing that the elevated synaptic efficacy observed with single-pulse LTP measurements disappears with higher-frequency test pulses, have critically challenged the conventional assumption that LTP reflects a general gain increase. Redistribution of synaptic efficacy (RSE) is here seen as the local realization of a global design principle in a neural network for pattern coding. As is typical of many coding systems, the network learns by dynamically balancing a pattern-independent increase in strength against a pattern-specific increase in selectivity. This computation is implemented by a monotonic long-term memory process which has a bidirectional effect on the postsynaptic potential via functionally complementary signal components. These frequency-dependent and frequency-independent components realize the balance between specific and nonspecific functions at each synapse. This synaptic balance suggests a functional purpose for RSE which, by dynamically bounding total memory change, implements a distributed coding scheme which is stable with fast as well as slow learning. Although RSE would seem to make it impossible to code high-frequency input features, a network preprocessing step called complement coding symmetrizes the input representation, which allows the system to encode high-frequency as well as low-frequency features in an input pattern. A possible physical model interprets the two synaptic signal components in terms of ligand-gated and voltage-gated receptors, where learning converts channels from one type to another.Office of Naval Research and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (N00014-95-1-0409, N00014-1-95-0657

Adaptive Resonance: An Emerging Neural Theory of Cognition

Adaptive resonance is a theory of cognitive information processing which has been realized as a family of neural network models. In recent years, these models have evolved to incorporate new capabilities in the cognitive, neural, computational, and technological domains. Minimal models provide a conceptual framework, for formulating questions about the nature of cognition; an architectural framework, for mapping cognitive functions to cortical regions; a semantic framework, for precisely defining terms; and a computational framework, for testing hypotheses. These systems are here exemplified by the distributed ART (dART) model, which generalizes localist ART systems to allow arbitrarily distributed code representations, while retaining basic capabilities such as stable fast learning and scalability. Since each component is placed in the context of a unified real-time system, analysis can move from the level of neural processes, including learning laws and rules of synaptic transmission, to cognitive processes, including attention and consciousness. Local design is driven by global functional constraints, with each network synthesizing a dynamic balance of opposing tendencies. The self-contained working ART and dART models can also be transferred to technology, in areas that include remote sensing, sensor fusion, and content-addressable information retrieval from large databases.Office of Naval Research and the defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (N00014-95-1-0409, N00014-1-95-0657); National Institutes of Health (20-316-4304-5

ART Neural Networks: Distributed Coding and ARTMAP Applications

ART (Adaptive Resonance Theory) neural networks for fast, stable learning and prediction have been applied in a variety of areas. Applications include airplane design and manufacturing, automatic target recognition, financial forecasting, machine tool monitoring, digital circuit design, chemical analysis, and robot vision. Supervised ART architectures, called ARTMAP systems, feature internal control mechanisms that create stable recognition categories of optimal size by maximizing code compression while minimizing predictive error in an on-line setting. Special-purpose requirements of various application domains have led to a number of ARTMAP variants, including fuzzy ARTMAP, ART-EMAP, Gaussian ARTMAP, and distributed ARTMAP. ARTMAP has been used for a variety of applications, including computer-assisted medical diagnosis. Medical databases present many of the challenges found in general information management settings where speed, efficiency, ease of use, and accuracy are at a premium. A direct goal of improved computer-assisted medicine is to help deliver quality emergency care in situations that may be less than ideal. Working with these problems has stimulated a number of ART architecture developments, including ARTMAP-IC [1]. This paper describes a recent collaborative effort, using a new cardiac care database for system development, has brought together medical statisticians and clinicians at the New England Medical Center with researchers developing expert systems and neural networks, in order to create a hybrid method for medical diagnosis. The paper also considers new neural network architectures, including distributed ART {dART), a real-time model of parallel distributed pattern learning that permits fast as well as slow adaptation, without catastrophic forgetting. Local synaptic computations in the dART model quantitatively match the paradoxical phenomenon of Markram-Tsodyks [2] redistribution of synaptic efficacy, as a consequence of global system hypotheses.Office of Naval Research (N00014-95-1-0409, N00014-95-1-0657

Memory and information processing in neuromorphic systems

A striking difference between brain-inspired neuromorphic processors and current von Neumann processors architectures is the way in which memory and processing is organized. As Information and Communication Technologies continue to address the need for increased computational power through the increase of cores within a digital processor, neuromorphic engineers and scientists can complement this need by building processor architectures where memory is distributed with the processing. In this paper we present a survey of brain-inspired processor architectures that support models of cortical networks and deep neural networks. These architectures range from serial clocked implementations of multi-neuron systems to massively parallel asynchronous ones and from purely digital systems to mixed analog/digital systems which implement more biological-like models of neurons and synapses together with a suite of adaptation and learning mechanisms analogous to the ones found in biological nervous systems. We describe the advantages of the different approaches being pursued and present the challenges that need to be addressed for building artificial neural processing systems that can display the richness of behaviors seen in biological systems.Comment: Submitted to Proceedings of IEEE, review of recently proposed neuromorphic computing platforms and system

Formal Modeling of Connectionism using Concurrency Theory, an Approach Based on Automata and Model Checking

This paper illustrates a framework for applying formal methods techniques, which are symbolic in nature, to specifying and verifying neural networks, which are sub-symbolic in nature. The paper describes a communicating automata [Bowman & Gomez, 2006] model of neural networks. We also implement the model using timed automata [Alur & Dill, 1994] and then undertake a verification of these models using the model checker Uppaal [Pettersson, 2000] in order to evaluate the performance of learning algorithms. This paper also presents discussion of a number of broad issues concerning cognitive neuroscience and the debate as to whether symbolic processing or connectionism is a suitable representation of cognitive systems. Additionally, the issue of integrating symbolic techniques, such as formal methods, with complex neural networks is discussed. We then argue that symbolic verifications may give theoretically well-founded ways to evaluate and justify neural learning systems in the field of both theoretical research and real world applications

Fast Synchronization of Perpetual Grouping in Laminar Visual Cortical Circuits

Perceptual grouping is well-known to be a fundamental process during visual perception, notably grouping across scenic regions that do not receive contrastive visual inputs. Illusory contours are a classical example of such groupings. Recent psychophysical and neurophysiological evidence have shown that the grouping process can facilitate rapid synchronization of the cells that are bound together by a grouping, even when the grouping must be completed across regions that receive no contrastive inputs. Synchronous grouping can hereby bind together different object parts that may have become desynchronized due to a variety of factors, and can enhance the efficiency of cortical transmission. Neural models of perceptual grouping have clarified how such fast synchronization may occur by using bipole grouping cells, whose predicted properties have been supported by psychophysical, anatomical, and neurophysiological experiments. These models have not, however, incorporated some of the realistic constraints on which groupings in the brain are conditioned, notably the measured spatial extent of long-range interactions in layer 2/3 of a grouping network, and realistic synaptic and axonal signaling delays within and across cells in different cortical layers. This work addresses the question: Can long-range interactions that obey the bipole constraint achieve fast synchronization under realistic anatomical and neurophysiological constraints that initially desynchronize grouping signals? Can the cells that synchronize retain their analog sensitivity to changing input amplitudes? Can the grouping process complete and synchronize illusory contours across gaps in bottom-up inputs? Our simulations show that the answer to these questions is Yes.Office of Naval Research (N00014-01-1-0624); Air Force Office of Scientific Research (F49620-01-1-03097

Neural Network Models of Learning and Memory: Leading Questions and an Emerging Framework

Office of Naval Research and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (N00014-95-1-0409, N00014-1-95-0657); National Institutes of Health (NIH 20-316-4304-5