Nice, see you on Wednesday!

On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Steven Oberlin <[email protected]>wrote:

> Thanks, Jeff, that's illuminating.  I can see the inhibitory/coordinating
> behavior in how the CLA implements your cases 1 and 2.  I was pondering
> threshold-adjusting mechanisms like you describe in case 3, where lowered
> threshold might help recognition of a predicted pattern from incomplete
> input or vice versa to inhibit.  I like the "suggestibility" example.
>
> Looks like excitatory appears sufficient for most cases at the complexity
> level we're modeling today and feedback is an area open to further
> exploration.
>
> I live about an hour outside Portland.  Not planning to attend OSCON, but
> I think I'll get an exhibition pass for Wednesday and drop in on the BoF.
>  Maybe we can steer the conversation to hierarchy, feedback, and inhibition
> at some point.  :-)
>
> -Steve O.
>
> On Jul 22, 2013, at 11:14 AM, "Jeff Hawkins" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Steve,
> > Inhibition appears in three places in the biological theory of CLA, at
> least
> > in my head!  We haven't always pointed it out because it isn't
> necessarily
> > useful to think of inhibitory neurons when implementing the CLA in
> software.
> > The literature on inhibitory neurons is not as rich as it is for
> excitatory
> > neurons so it is harder to be precise on this.
> >
> > 1) There are inhibitory neurons that enforce sparsity. (used to enforce
> > sparsity)
> > 2) There are inhibitory neurons that help all the cells in a column be
> > activated together (these inhibitory cells inhibit other inhibitory
> cells in
> > a column).  This shows up in the software by having a column of cells
> > activated by the SP.
> > 3) There are inhibitory neurons that form inhibitory synapses along the
> > distal dendrites.  I speculate that these regulate the dendrite
> activation
> > threshold of the dendrite branches, and therefore control the sparseness
> of
> > the temporal pooler.  If not enough cells are pooling then the threshold
> > would be lowered.  We have never implemented or tested this idea.  I
> imagine
> > that when you look at a cloud and I say  "do you see the dog", your
> cortex
> > lowers the threshold of the dendrites to encourage the cortex to
> recognize
> > anything and hopefully see the dog shaped cloud.
> >
> > There are six or so different types of inhibitory neurons in cortex so
> the
> > situation is undoubtedly more complex.
> >
> > As far as I know all the cells that enter the white matter are
> excitatory.
> > So the feedback projections from one region to another are excitatory.
> The
> > general consensus is feedback axons form excitatory synapses on the
> apical
> > dendrites of cells in layers 2,3, and 5.  There still could be an
> inhibitory
> > effect but it would be secondary.
> >
> > We have not implemented feedback in a hierarchy other than some simple
> > experiments before we had the CLA.
> >
> > What I think is happening is a higher-level representation projects to
> lower
> > regions and associatively links to it.  In this  way the higher level
> region
> > can tell the lower level region what sequence of activity it should
> recall.
> > This would in effect eliminate alternate possibilities in the lower
> region.
> > Perhaps this addresses your concern
> >
> > This would be much easier to discuss in person.
> > Jeff
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nupic [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steven
> > Oberlin
> > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 10:15 AM
> > To: NuPIC general mailing list.
> > Subject: [nupic-dev] Inhibition and feedback
> >
> > Re-reading the CLA whitepaper, one thing that I've noticed is that the
> only
> > place inhibition appears is in the enforcement of the spacial pooler's
> > columnar constraint of winners to encourage SDR encodings of input
> patterns.
> >
> >
> > When arranging HTM regions in a hierarchy, I assume (perhaps incorrectly)
> > that some of the feedback from higher-level HTMs to lower-level HTMs
> would
> > be inhibitory, to reduce the likelihood of activations that aren't being
> > predicted in the larger context of the higher level sequence being played
> > out by the higher-level HTM (if that makes any sense).  However, it
> seems to
> > me that it is not currently possible to provide an inhibitory input into
> an
> > HTM region because of the way input data is gated and summed by the
> spacial
> > pooler, i.e., there is no way to learn that active input bits (1's in the
> > input stream) mean recognition of a pattern should be suppressed.
> >
> > I suppose that feedback from higher-level to lower-level HTMs in a
> hierarchy
> > could be excitatory-only, i.e., "1's from above" are learned in the mix
> of
> > input bits by lower-levels to help gate predicted patterns, but then it
> > seems to me that we would need a lot of copies of each feedback bit to
> > multiply its semantic force so it could have a significant influence on
> the
> > activation sum being computed by the spacial pooler.  This seems
> > inefficient, though it makes use of existing learning mechanisms.
> >
> > How is hierarchical feedback intended or imagined to be accomplished?  Is
> > inhibition necessary?  Maybe feedback shouldn't even be injected along
> with
> > "ordinary" feed-forward input bits, should instead be a factor in
> individual
> > column boost calculations, or...
> >
> > Perhaps this is an out-of-scope topic.  Let me know if I'm off in the
> > weeds...
> >
> > -Steve O.
> > _______________________________________________
> > nupic mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.numenta.org/mailman/listinfo/nupic_lists.numenta.org
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > nupic mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.numenta.org/mailman/listinfo/nupic_lists.numenta.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nupic mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.numenta.org/mailman/listinfo/nupic_lists.numenta.org
>
_______________________________________________
nupic mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.numenta.org/mailman/listinfo/nupic_lists.numenta.org

Reply via email to