Identifying Learning Rules From Neural Network Observables
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The brain modifies its synaptic strengths during learning in order to better adapt to its environment. However, the underlying plasticity rules that govern learning are unknown. Many proposals have been suggested, including Hebbian mechanisms, explicit error backpropagation, and a variety of alternatives. It is an open question as to what specific experimental measurements would need to be made to determine whether any given learning rule is operative in a real biological system. In this work, we take a "virtual experimental" approach to this problem. Simulating idealized neuroscience experiments with artificial neural networks, we generate a large-scale dataset of learning trajectories of aggregate statistics measured in a variety of neural network architectures, loss functions, learning rule hyperparameters, and parameter initializations. We then take a discriminative approach, training linear and simple non-linear classifiers to identify learning rules from features based on these observables. We show that different classes of learning rules can be separated solely on the basis of aggregate statistics of the weights, activations, or instantaneous layer-wise activity changes, and that these results generalize to limited access to the trajectory and held-out architectures and learning curricula. We identify the statistics of each observable that are most relevant for rule identification, finding that statistics from network activities across training are more robust to unit undersampling and measurement noise than those obtained from the synaptic strengths. Our results suggest that activation patterns, available from electrophysiological recordings of post-synaptic activities on the order of several hundred units, frequently measured at wider intervals over the course of learning, may provide a good basis on which to identify learning rules.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 22 Oct 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 3; 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 3.
9 papers.
- 2023Beyond Geometry: Comparing the Temporal Structure of Computation in Neural Circuits with Dynamical Similarity Analysiscited by 21
- 2021Learning cortical representations through perturbed and adversarial dreamingcited by 10
- 2025Feature Learning beyond the Lazy-Rich Dichotomy: Insights from Representational Geometrycited by 9
- 2022Neuro-Symbolic Learning: Principles and Applications in Ophthalmologycited by 7
- 2022Distinguishing Learning Rules with Brain Machine Interfacescited by 5
- 2022Beyond accuracy: generalization properties of bio-plausible temporal credit assignment rulescited by 3
- 2025Can Biologically Plausible Temporal Credit Assignment Rules Match BPTT for Neural Similarity? E-prop as an Examplecited by 1
- 2024Dynamics of Supervised and Reinforcement Learning in the Non-Linear Perceptroncited by 0
- 2025Flexible inference for animal learning rules using neural networkscited by 0
- 2025Flexible inference for animal learning rules using neural networks4 Sep 2025
- 2025Can Biologically Plausible Temporal Credit Assignment Rules Match BPTT for Neural Similarity? E-prop as an Example7 Jun 2025
- 2025Feature Learning beyond the Lazy-Rich Dichotomy: Insights from Representational Geometry23 Mar 2025
- 2024Dynamics of Supervised and Reinforcement Learning in the Non-Linear Perceptron5 Sep 2024
- 2023Beyond Geometry: Comparing the Temporal Structure of Computation in Neural Circuits with Dynamical Similarity Analysis16 Jun 2023
- 2022Neuro-Symbolic Learning: Principles and Applications in Ophthalmology31 Jul 2022
- 2022Distinguishing Learning Rules with Brain Machine Interfaces27 Jun 2022
- 2022Beyond accuracy: generalization properties of bio-plausible temporal credit assignment rules2 Jun 2022
- 2021Learning cortical representations through perturbed and adversarial dreaming9 Sep 2021