MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399282900 · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012178

Synergistic information supports modality integration and flexible learning in neural networks solving multiple tasks

2024· article· en· W4399282900 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra M. Proca, Fernando E. Rosas, Andrea I. Luppi, Daniel Bor, Matthew Crosby, Pedro A. M. Mediano

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Computational Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersGates Cambridge TrustImperial College LondonWellcomeCambridge TrustAd Astra Chandaria FoundationWellcome Trust
KeywordsComputer scienceCognitionModality (human–computer interaction)Set (abstract data type)Information processingArtificial neural networkModalitiesArtificial intelligenceInformation integrationCognitive scienceMachine learningHuman–computer interactionPsychologyNeuroscienceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Striking progress has been made in understanding cognition by analyzing how the brain is engaged in different modes of information processing. For instance, so-called synergistic information (information encoded by a set of neurons but not by any subset) plays a key role in areas of the human brain linked with complex cognition. However, two questions remain unanswered: (a) how and why a cognitive system can become highly synergistic; and (b) how informational states map onto artificial neural networks in various learning modes. Here we employ an information-decomposition framework to investigate neural networks performing cognitive tasks. Our results show that synergy increases as networks learn multiple diverse tasks, and that in tasks requiring integration of multiple sources, performance critically relies on synergistic neurons. Overall, our results suggest that synergy is used to combine information from multiple modalities-and more generally for flexible and efficient learning. These findings reveal new ways of investigating how and why learning systems employ specific information-processing strategies, and support the principle that the capacity for general-purpose learning critically relies on the system's information dynamics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations23
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS Computational BiologySame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207