Synaptic Weight Distributions Depend on the Geometry of Plasticity
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
A growing literature in computational neuroscience leverages gradient descent and learning algorithms that approximate it to study synaptic plasticity in the brain. However, the vast majority of this work ignores a critical underlying assumption: the choice of distance for synaptic changes - i.e. the geometry of synaptic plasticity. Gradient descent assumes that the distance is Euclidean, but many other distances are possible, and there is no reason that biology necessarily uses Euclidean geometry. Here, using the theoretical tools provided by mirror descent, we show that the distribution of synaptic weights will depend on the geometry of synaptic plasticity. We use these results to show that experimentally-observed log-normal weight distributions found in several brain areas are not consistent with standard gradient descent (i.e. a Euclidean geometry), but rather with non-Euclidean distances. Finally, we show that it should be possible to experimentally test for different synaptic geometries by comparing synaptic weight distributions before and after learning. Overall, our work shows that the current paradigm in theoretical work on synaptic plasticity that assumes Euclidean synaptic geometry may be misguided and that it should be possible to experimentally determine the true geometry of synaptic plasticity in the brain.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 67 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 May 2023.
Builds on
30 of 67 references.
References · 30
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,160
- 2019EfficientNet: Rethinking Model Scaling for Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 6,415
- 2020Exploring Simple Siamese Representation Learningcited by 2,853
- 2018Neural Tangent Kernel: Convergence and Generalization in Neural Networkscited by 2,597
- 2018ShuffleNet V2: Practical Guidelines for Efficient CNN Architecture Designcited by 1,132
- 2019Wide Neural Networks of Any Depth Evolve as Linear Models Under Gradient Descentcited by 732
- 2018On Lazy Training in Differentiable Programmingcited by 671
- 2014Convex Optimization: Algorithms and Complexitycited by 569
- 2014New insights and perspectives on the natural gradient methodcited by 435
- 2017Implicit Regularization in Matrix Factorizationcited by 318
- 2018Gaussian Process Behaviour in Wide Deep Neural Networkscited by 314
18 more
- 2018Characterizing Implicit Bias in Terms of Optimization Geometrycited by 259
- 2022Self-Consistent Dynamical Field Theory of Kernel Evolution in Wide Neural Networkscited by 104
- 2019Brain-Like Object Recognition with High-Performing Shallow Recurrent ANNscited by 90
- 2019Deep Learning without Weight Transportcited by 87
- 2015How Important is Weight Symmetry in Backpropagation?cited by 57
- 2021Powerpropagation: A sparsity inducing weight reparameterisationcited by 49
- 2019Stochastic Mirror Descent on Overparameterized Nonlinear Models: Convergence, Implicit Regularization, and Generalizationcited by 40
- 2020Mirror Descent and the Information Ratiocited by 39
- 2019Exponentiated Gradient Meets Gradient Descentcited by 32
- 2018Stochastic Gradient/Mirror Descent: Minimax Optimality and Implicit Regularizationcited by 29
- 2018Task-Driven Convolutional Recurrent Models of the Visual Systemcited by 27
- 2020Kernelized information bottleneck leads to biologically plausible 3-factor Hebbian learning in deep networkscited by 25
- 2022Making Look-Ahead Active Learning Strategies Feasible with Neural Tangent Kernelscited by 25
- 2021Credit Assignment Through Broadcasting a Global Error Vectorcited by 19
- 2023How to prepare your task head for finetuningcited by 18
- 2020Biological credit assignment through dynamic inversion of feedforward networkscited by 10
- 2018On the choice of metric in gradient-based theories of brain functioncited by 8
- 2022A theory of learning with constrained weight-distributioncited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 2.
4 papers.
- 2023How connectivity structure shapes rich and lazy learning in neural circuitscited by 15
- 2024Is All Learning (Natural) Gradient Descent?cited by 2
- 2025Dale meets Langevin: A Multiplicative Denoising Diffusion Modelcited by 2
- 2025Curl Descent: Non-Gradient Learning Dynamics with Sign-Diverse Plasticitycited by 2
- 2025Curl Descent: Non-Gradient Learning Dynamics with Sign-Diverse Plasticity3 Oct 2025
- 2025Dale meets Langevin: A Multiplicative Denoising Diffusion Model3 Oct 2025
- 2024Is All Learning (Natural) Gradient Descent?24 Sep 2024
- 2023How connectivity structure shapes rich and lazy learning in neural circuits12 Oct 2023