Search

Feed-forward convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are currently state-of-the-art for object classification tasks such as ImageNet. Further, they are quantitatively accurate models of temporally-averaged responses of neurons in the primate brain's visual system. However, biological visual systems have two ubiquitous architectural features not shared with typical CNNs: local recurrence within cortical areas, and long-range feedback from downstream areas to upstream areas. Here we explored the role of recurrence in improving classification performance. We found that standard forms of recurrence (vanilla RNNs and LSTMs) do not perform well within deep CNNs on the ImageNet task. In contrast, novel cells that incorporated two structural features, bypassing and gating, were able to boost task accuracy substantially. We extended these design principles in an automated search over thousands of model architectures, which identified novel local recurrent cells and long-range feedback connections useful for object recognition. Moreover, these task-optimized ConvRNNs matched the dynamics of neural activity in the primate visual system better than feedforward networks, suggesting a role for the brain's recurrent connections in performing difficult visual behaviors., NIPS 2018 Camera Ready Version, 16 pages including supplementary information, 6 figures

Task-based modeling with recurrent neural networks (RNNs) has emerged as a popular way to infer the computational function of different brain regions. These models are quantitatively assessed by comparing the low-dimensional neural representations of the model with the brain, for example using canonical correlation analysis (CCA). However, the nature of the detailed neurobiological inferences one can draw from such efforts remains elusive. For example, to what extent does training neural networks to solve common tasks uniquely determine the network dynamics, independent of modeling architectural choices? Or alternatively, are the learned dynamics highly sensitive to different model choices? Knowing the answer to these questions has strong implications for whether and how we should use task-based RNN modeling to understand brain dynamics. To address these foundational questions, we study populations of thousands of networks, with commonly used RNN architectures, trained to solve neuroscientifically motivated tasks and characterize their nonlinear dynamics. We find the geometry of the RNN representations can be highly sensitive to different network architectures, yielding a cautionary tale for measures of similarity that rely representational geometry, such as CCA. Moreover, we find that while the geometry of neural dynamics can vary greatly across architectures, the underlying computational scaffold---the topological structure of fixed points, transitions between them, limit cycles, and linearized dynamics---often appears universal across all architectures., Comment: Presented at NeurIPS 2019

Recurrent neural networks (RNNs) are a widely used tool for modeling sequential data, yet they are often treated as inscrutable black boxes. Given a trained recurrent network, we would like to reverse engineer it--to obtain a quantitative, interpretable description of how it solves a particular task. Even for simple tasks, a detailed understanding of how recurrent networks work, or a prescription for how to develop such an understanding, remains elusive. In this work, we use tools from dynamical systems analysis to reverse engineer recurrent networks trained to perform sentiment classification, a foundational natural language processing task. Given a trained network, we find fixed points of the recurrent dynamics and linearize the nonlinear system around these fixed points. Despite their theoretical capacity to implement complex, high-dimensional computations, we find that trained networks converge to highly interpretable, low-dimensional representations. In particular, the topological structure of the fixed points and corresponding linearized dynamics reveal an approximate line attractor within the RNN, which we can use to quantitatively understand how the RNN solves the sentiment analysis task. Finally, we find this mechanism present across RNN architectures (including LSTMs, GRUs, and vanilla RNNs) trained on multiple datasets, suggesting that our findings are not unique to a particular architecture or dataset. Overall, these results demonstrate that surprisingly universal and human interpretable computations can arise across a range of recurrent networks., Presented at NeurIPS 2019