Efficient and robust multi-task learning in the brain with modular task primitives.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a real-world setting biological agents do not have infinite resources to learn new things. It is thus useful to recycle previously acquired knowledge in a way that allows for faster, less resource-intensive acquisition of multiple new skills. Neural networks in the brain are likely not entirely re-trained with new tasks, but how they leverage existing computations to learn new tasks is not well understood. In this work, we study this question in artificial neural networks trained on commonly used neuroscience paradigms. Building on recent work from the multi-task learning literature, we propose two ingredients: (1) network modularity, and (2) learning task primitives. Together, these ingredients form inductive biases we call structural and functional, respectively. Using a corpus of nine different tasks, we show that a modular network endowed with task primitives allows for learning multiple tasks well while keeping parameter counts, and updates, low. We also show that the skills acquired with our approach are more robust to a broad range of perturbations compared to those acquired with other multi-task learning strategies. This work offers a new perspective on achieving efficient multi-task learning in the brain, and makes predictions for novel neuroscience experiments in which targeted perturbations are employed to explore solution spaces.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".