Dan Goodman, co-founder of Neuromatch and creator of the Brian spiking neural network simulator, discusses the importance of spikes in intelligent systems and the curious choice of modern neural networks to disregard spiking. They delve into the intricacies of spiking neural networks, the transition from math to neuroscience, the creation of complex tasks for neural networks, and the challenges in training them. They also explore the impact of advanced technology on human intelligence.
The significance of heterogeneity in time constants in spiking neural networks can lead to better performance and is energetically more efficient than not having it.
Sparsity is an important principle of brain reckoning, both temporally and spatially, allowing for more efficient and robust computation.
Exploring different aspects of brain computation, such as heterogeneity in time constants and the role of sparsity, can provide valuable insights and contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of brain function.
Deep dives
Heterogeneous time constants and their significance in spiking neural networks
In recent research, the significance of heterogeneity in time constants in spiking neural networks has been explored. By allowing the neuron parameters, such as time constants, to be trainable, it was discovered that the more temporal structure a task had, the more improvement was seen from the heterogeneity in time constants. This improvement was found to be as significant as multiplying the number of neurons by 10 or 100. This suggests that having heterogeneity in time constants is energetically more efficient than not having it, and it can lead to better performance. However, more research is needed to fully understand the underlying principles and mechanisms behind this phenomenon.
The role of sparsity in brain computation
Sparsity, both in temporal and spatial domains, is an important principle of brain reckoning. Temporally, spikes are sparse, occurring infrequently in time, and spatially, the connectivity in the brain is sparse. Sparsity can be seen as a way to throw away irrelevant information and only keep what matters. This can lead to more efficient and robust computation. The information bottleneck principle, which maximizes information about the relevant features while minimizing information about everything else, provides a mathematical framework for understanding the importance of sparsity in brain computation. While more research is needed, understanding how sparsity contributes to brain functionality can provide insights into the underlying principles of neural computation.
Searching for unifying perspectives
While there is a level of complexity and diversity in the brain that makes a unifying theory challenging, it is still worthwhile to explore and search for unifying perspectives. By studying different aspects of brain computation, such as heterogeneity in time constants and the role of sparsity, valuable insights can be gained. However, it is important to approach these complex questions with an open mind, combining theoretical and experimental approaches to build a more comprehensive understanding of brain function.
The Importance of Sparsity in Network Specialization
The podcast episode explores the importance of sparsity in network structures and its role in creating functional specialization. The speaker discusses a recent study conducted with a PhD student to understand the extent to which sparsity alone can cause different elements of a network to learn different functions. They found that while sparsity on its own was not enough to automatically learn different functions, combining sparsity with other forms of resource constraint led to robust specialization. The speaker also highlights the challenges in isolating sparsity as the sole factor and controlling other variables in the study.
The Ecological Turn in Neuroscience and its Challenges
The podcast delves into the current shift towards more ecological approaches in neuroscience research, in contrast to traditional controlled experiments. The guest shares their interest in studying naturalistic behaviors and environments in neuroscience. However, they acknowledge the difficulties in conducting experiments in these less controlled settings and the need to develop appropriate methodologies for analyzing data from these experiments. The conversation explores the value of ecological neuroscience in understanding the brain's functioning and behavior, despite the challenges it presents in terms of experimental design and interpretation.
Support the show to get full episodes, full archive, and join the Discord community.
You may know my guest as the co-founder of Neuromatch, the excellent online computational neuroscience academy, or as the creator of the Brian spiking neural network simulator, which is freely available. I know him as a spiking neural network practitioner extraordinaire. Dan Goodman runs the Neural Reckoning Group at Imperial College London, where they use spiking neural networks to figure out how biological and artificial brains reckon, or compute.
All of the current AI we use to do all the impressive things we do, essentially all of it, is built on artificial neural networks. Notice the word "neural" there. That word is meant to communicate that these artificial networks do stuff the way our brains do stuff. And indeed, if you take a few steps back, spin around 10 times, take a few shots of whiskey, and squint hard enough, there is a passing resemblance. One thing you'll probably still notice, in your drunken stupor, is that, among the thousand ways ANNs differ from brains, is that they don't use action potentials, or spikes. From the perspective of neuroscience, that can seem mighty curious. Because, for decades now, neuroscience has focused on spikes as the things that make our cognition tick.
We count them and compare them in different conditions, and generally put a lot of stock in their usefulness in brains.
So what does it mean that modern neural networks disregard spiking altogether?
Maybe spiking really isn't important to process and transmit information as well as our brains do. Or maybe spiking is one among many ways for intelligent systems to function well. Dan shares some of what he's learned and how he thinks about spiking and SNNs and a host of other topics.
0:00 - Intro
3:47 - Why spiking neural networks, and a mathematical background
13:16 - Efficiency
17:36 - Machine learning for neuroscience
19:38 - Why not jump ship from SNNs?
23:35 - Hard and easy tasks
29:20 - How brains and nets learn
32:50 - Exploratory vs. theory-driven science
37:32 - Static vs. dynamic
39:06 - Heterogeneity
46:01 - Unifying principles vs. a hodgepodge
50:37 - Sparsity
58:05 - Specialization and modularity
1:00:51 - Naturalistic experiments
1:03:41 - Projects for SNN research
1:05:09 - The right level of abstraction
1:07:58 - Obstacles to progress
1:12:30 - Levels of explanation
1:14:51 - What has AI taught neuroscience?
1:22:06 - How has neuroscience helped AI?
Get the Snipd podcast app
Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Save any moment
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Share & Export
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode