MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411551078 · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1013056

Impact of symmetry in local learning rules on predictive neural representations and generalization in spatial navigation

2025· article· en· W4411551078 on OpenAlexaff
Janis Keck, Caswell Barry, Christian F. Doeller, Jürgen Jost

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Computational Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersMax-Planck-Institut für Mathematik in den NaturwissenschaftenMax-Planck-Institut für Kognitions- und NeurowissenschaftenMax Planck School of CognitionWellcome Trust
KeywordsLearning ruleGeneralizationReinforcement learningSuccessor cardinalRepresentation (politics)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceSymmetry (geometry)Feature learningState spaceSpace (punctuation)ENCODEArtificial neural networkMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In spatial cognition, the Successor Representation (SR) from reinforcement learning provides a compelling candidate of how predictive representations are used to encode space. In particular, hippocampal place cells are hypothesized to encode the SR. Here, we investigate how varying the temporal symmetry in learning rules influences those representations. To this end, we use a simple local learning rule which can be made insensitive to the temporal order. We analytically find that a symmetric learning rule results in a successor representation under a symmetrized version of the experienced transition structure. We then apply this rule to a two-layer neural network model loosely resembling hippocampal subfields CA3 - with a symmetric learning rule and recurrent weights - and CA1 - with an asymmetric learning rule and no recurrent weights. Here, when exposed repeatedly to a linear track, neurons in our model in CA3 show less shift of the centre of mass than those in CA1, in line with existing empirical findings. Investigating the functional benefits of such symmetry, we employ a simple reinforcement learning agent which may learn symmetric or classical successor representations. Here, we find that using a symmetric learning rule yields representations which afford better generalization, when the agent is probed to navigate to a new target without relearning the SR. This effect is reversed when the state space is not symmetric anymore. Thus, our results hint at a potential benefit of the inductive bias afforded by symmetric learning rules in areas employed in spatial navigation, where there naturally is a symmetry in the state space.

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)0.000
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 score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS Computational BiologySame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207