MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404061367 · doi:10.1103/physreve.110.054303

Fault-tolerant neural networks from biological error correction codes

2024· article· en· W4404061367 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alexander Zlokapa, Andrew K. Tan, John M. Martyn, Ila Fiete, Max Tegmark, Isaac L. Chuang

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Defense Science and Engineering GraduateHertz FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceFault toleranceArtificial neural networkError detection and correctionAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceDistributed computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been an open question in deep learning if fault-tolerant computation is possible: can arbitrarily reliable computation be achieved using only unreliable neurons? In the grid cells of the mammalian cortex, analog error correction codes have been observed to protect states against neural spiking noise, but their role in information processing is unclear. Here, we use these biological error correction codes to develop a universal fault-tolerant neural network that achieves reliable computation if the faultiness of each neuron lies below a sharp threshold; remarkably, we find that noisy biological neurons fall below this threshold. The discovery of a phase transition from faulty to fault-tolerant neural computation suggests a mechanism for reliable computation in the cortex and opens a path towards understanding noisy analog systems relevant to artificial intelligence and neuromorphic computing.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. ESame topicAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingFrench-language works237,207