MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769490618 · doi:10.1162/neco_a_01160

Equivalence of Equilibrium Propagation and Recurrent Backpropagation

2018· preprint· en· W2769490618 on OpenAlexafffund
Benjamin Scellier, Yoshua Bengio

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Computation · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchUniversité de Montréal
FundersSamsungNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsBackpropagationArtificial neural networkRecurrent neural networkEquivalence (formal languages)Computer scienceEquilibrium pointPropagation of uncertaintyFixed pointAlgorithmComputationMathematicsArtificial intelligenceDiscrete mathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recurrent backpropagation and equilibrium propagation are supervised learning algorithms for fixed-point recurrent neural networks, which differ in their second phase. In the first phase, both algorithms converge to a fixed point that corresponds to the configuration where the prediction is made. In the second phase, equilibrium propagation relaxes to another nearby fixed point corresponding to smaller prediction error, whereas recurrent backpropagation uses a side network to compute error derivatives iteratively. In this work, we establish a close connection between these two algorithms. We show that at every moment in the second phase, the temporal derivatives of the neural activities in equilibrium propagation are equal to the error derivatives computed iteratively by recurrent backpropagation in the side network. This work shows that it is not required to have a side network for the computation of error derivatives and supports the hypothesis that in biological neural networks, temporal derivatives of neural activities may code for error signals.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeural ComputationSame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207