10.7AIAug 22, 2024
Multilevel Interpretability Of Artificial Neural Networks: Leveraging Framework And Methods From NeuroscienceZhonghao He, Jascha Achterberg, Katie Collins et al. · cambridge
As deep learning systems are scaled up to many billions of parameters, relating their internal structure to external behaviors becomes very challenging. Although daunting, this problem is not new: Neuroscientists and cognitive scientists have accumulated decades of experience analyzing a particularly complex system - the brain. In this work, we argue that interpreting both biological and artificial neural systems requires analyzing those systems at multiple levels of analysis, with different analytic tools for each level. We first lay out a joint grand challenge among scientists who study the brain and who study artificial neural networks: understanding how distributed neural mechanisms give rise to complex cognition and behavior. We then present a series of analytical tools that can be used to analyze biological and artificial neural systems, organizing those tools according to Marr's three levels of analysis: computation/behavior, algorithm/representation, and implementation. Overall, the multilevel interpretability framework provides a principled way to tackle neural system complexity; links structure, computation, and behavior; clarifies assumptions and research priorities at each level; and paves the way toward a unified effort for understanding intelligent systems, may they be biological or artificial.
6.7NEMar 21, 2023
Building artificial neural circuits for domain-general cognition: a primer on brain-inspired systems-level architectureJascha Achterberg, Danyal Akarca, Moataz Assem et al. · cambridge
There is a concerted effort to build domain-general artificial intelligence in the form of universal neural network models with sufficient computational flexibility to solve a wide variety of cognitive tasks but without requiring fine-tuning on individual problem spaces and domains. To do this, models need appropriate priors and inductive biases, such that trained models can generalise to out-of-distribution examples and new problem sets. Here we provide an overview of the hallmarks endowing biological neural networks with the functionality needed for flexible cognition, in order to establish which features might also be important to achieve similar functionality in artificial systems. We specifically discuss the role of system-level distribution of network communication and recurrence, in addition to the role of short-term topological changes for efficient local computation. As machine learning models become more complex, these principles may provide valuable directions in an otherwise vast space of possible architectures. In addition, testing these inductive biases within artificial systems may help us to understand the biological principles underlying domain-general cognition.
7.6NEMay 5
Unifying Dynamical Systems and Graph Theory to Mechanistically Understand Computation in Neural NetworksJatin Sharma, Danyal Akarca, Dan F. M Goodman
Understanding how biological and artificial neural networks implement computation from connectivity is a central problem in neuroscience and machine learning. In neural systems, structural and functional connectivity are known to diverge, motivating approaches that move beyond direct connections alone. Here, we show that the spatial and temporal function of recurrent neural networks (RNNs) trained on hierarchically modular tasks can be recovered by modelling the network as a graph and analysing the multi-hop pathways between input and output units. In particular, decomposing these pathways by hop length reveals how the network temporally routes information. This perspective reframes regularisation: if function is implemented through multi-hop communication, then standard penalties such as L1 regularisation, which act only on individual weights, constrain single-hop structure rather than the multi-hop pathways that support computation. Motivated by this view, we introduce resolvent-RNNs (R-RNNs), which constrain multi-hop pathways and thereby induce temporal sparsity beyond that achieved by standard L1 regularisation. Compared with L1 regularisation, R-RNNs achieve improved performance by inducing temporal sparsity that matches the task structure, even when the task signal is sparse. Moreover, R-RNNs exhibit stronger sparsity-function alignment, reflected in their increased robustness under strong regularisation. Together, our results identify multi-hop communication as a key principle linking structure to function in recurrent networks, and suggest that sparsity should be defined over functional pathways rather than individual parameters.