Effects of neuromodulation-inspired mechanisms on the performance of deep neural networks in a spatial learning task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, the biological underpinnings of adaptive learning have been modeled, leading to faster model convergence and various behavioral benefits in tasks including spatial navigation and cue-reward association. Furthermore, studies have investigated how the neuromodulatory system, a major driver of synaptic plasticity and state-dependent changes in the brain neuronal activities, plays a role in training deep neural networks (DNNs). In this study, we extended previous studies on neuromodulation-inspired DNNs and explored the effects of neuromodulatory components on learning and single unit activities in a spatial learning task. Under the multiscale neuromodulatory framework, plastic components, dropout probability modulation, and learning rate decay were added to the single unit, layer, and whole network levels of DNN models, respectively. We observed behavioral benefits including faster learning and smaller error of ambulation. We then concluded that neuromodulatory components can affect learning trajectories, outcomes, and single unit activities, in a component- and hyperparameter-dependent manner.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".