ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2023
Biologically plausible local synaptic learning rules robustly implement deep supervised learning.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Backpropagation-free spiking neural networks with the forward-forward algorithm.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
In deep neural networks, representational learning in the middle layer is essential for achieving efficient learning. However, the currently prevailing backpropagation learning rules (BP) are not necessarily biologically plausible and cannot be implemented in the brain in their current form. Therefore, to elucidate the learning rules used by the brain, it is critical to establish biologically plausible learning rules for practical memory tasks. For example, learning rules that result in a learning performance worse than that of animals observed in experimental studies may not be computations used in real brains and should be ruled out. Using numerical simulations, we developed biologically plausible learning rules to solve a task that replicates a laboratory experiment where mice learned to predict the correct reward amount. Although the extreme learning machine (ELM) and weight perturbation (WP) learning rules performed worse than the mice, the feedback alignment (FA) rule achieved a performance equal to that of BP. To obtain a more biologically plausible model, we developed a variant of FA, FA_Ex-100%, which implements direct dopamine inputs that provide error signals locally in the layer of focus, as found in the mouse entorhinal cortex. The performance of FA_Ex-100% was comparable to that of conventional BP. Finally, we tested whether FA_Ex-100% was robust against rule perturbations and biologically inevitable noise. FA_Ex-100% worked even when subjected to perturbations, presumably because it could calibrate the correct prediction error (e.g., dopaminergic signals) in the next step as a teaching signal if the perturbation created a deviation. These results suggest that simplified and biologically plausible learning rules, such as FA_Ex-100%, can robustly facilitate deep supervised learning when the error signal, possibly conveyed by dopaminergic neurons, is accurate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.