Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32132915›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2020

Adaptive Tuning Curve Widths Improve Sample Efficient Learning.

Florian Meier, Raphaël Dang-Nhu, Angelika Steger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Florian MeierDepartment of Computer Science, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Raphaël Dang-NhuDepartment of Computer Science, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Angelika StegerDepartment of Computer Science, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural brains perform miraculously well in learning new tasks from a small number of samples, whereas sample efficient learning is still a major open problem in the field of machine learning. Here, we raise the question, how the neural coding scheme affects sample efficiency, and make first progress on this question by proposing and analyzing a learning algorithm that uses a simple reinforce-type plasticity mechanism and does not require any gradients to learn low dimensional mappings. It harnesses three bio-plausible mechanisms, namely, population codes with bell shaped tuning curves, continous attractor mechanisms and probabilistic synapses, to achieve sample efficient learning. We show both theoretically and by simulations that population codes with broadly tuned neurons lead to high sample efficiency, whereas codes with sharply tuned neurons account for high final precision. Moreover, a dynamic adaptation of the tuning width during learning gives rise to both, high sample efficiency and high final precision. We prove a sample efficiency guarantee for our algorithm that lies within a logarithmic factor from the information theoretical optimum. Our simulations show that for low dimensional mappings, our learning algorithm achieves comparable sample efficiency to multi-layer perceptrons trained by gradient descent, although it does not use any gradients. Furthermore, it achieves competitive sample efficiency in low dimensional reinforcement learning tasks. From a machine learning perspective, these findings may inspire novel approaches to improve sample efficiency. From a neuroscience perspective, these findings suggest sample efficiency as a yet unstudied functional role of adaptive tuning curve width.

Indexed as

gradient-free learningneural tuning curvespopulation codesreinforcement learningsample efficiency

Identifiers

PMID32132915
PMCPMC7041413

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.