Ascribing computational principles to neural feedback circuits is an important problem in theoretical neuroscience. We study symmetric threshold-linear networks and derive stability results that go beyond the insights that can be gained from Lyapunov theory or energy functions. By applying linear analysis to subnetworks composed of coactive neurons, we determine the stability of potential steady states. We find that stability depends on two types of eigenmodes. One type determines global stability and the other type determines whether or not multistability is possible.

We present an improvement of Novikoff's perceptron convergence theorem. Reinterpreting this mistake bound as a margin dependent sparsity guarantee allows us to give a PACstyle generalisation error bound for the classifier learned by the perceptron learning algorithm. The bound value crucially depends on the margin a support vector machine would achieve on the same data set using the same kernel. Ironically, the bound yields better guarantees than are currently available for the support vector solution itself.

Hebbian and competitive Hebbian algorithms are almost ubiquitous in modeling pattern formation in cortical development. We analyse in theoretical detail a particular model (adapted from Piepenbrock & Obermayer, 1999) for the development of Id stripe-like patterns, which places competitive and interactive cortical influences, and free and restricted initial arborisation onto a common footing. 1 Introduction Cats, many species of monkeys, and humans exibit ocular dominance stripes, which are alternating areas of primary visual cortex devoted to input from (the thalamic relay associated with) just one or the other eye (see Erwin et aI, 1995; Miller, 1996; Swindale, 1996 for reviews of theory and data). These well-known fingerprint patterns have been a seductive target for models of cortical pattern formation because of the mix of competition and cooperation they suggest. A wealth of synaptic adaptation algorithms has been suggested to account for them (and also the concomitant refinement of the topography of the map between the eyes and the cortex), many of which are based on forms of Hebbian learning. Critical issues for the models are the degree of correlation between inputs from the eyes, the nature of the initial arborisation of the axonal inputs, the degree and form of cortical competition, and the nature of synaptic saturation (preventing weights from changing sign or getting too large) and normalisation (allowing cortical and/or thalamic cells to support only a certain total synaptic weight).

Until recently, most of the research in that area has focused on uniform a-priori bounds giving a guarantee that the difference between the training error and the test error is uniformly small for any hypothesis in a given class. These bounds are usually expressed in terms of combinatorial quantities such as VCdimension. In the last few years, researchers have tried to use more refined quantities to either estimate the complexity of the search space (e.g.

The resulting combinatorial problem - finding the best agreement half-space over an input sample - is NP hard to approximate to within some constant factor. We suggest a way to circumvent this theoretical bound by introducing a new measure of success for such algorithms. An algorithm is ILmargin successful if the agreement ratio of the half-space it outputs is as good as that of any half-space once training points that are inside the ILmargins of its separating hyper-plane are disregarded. We prove crisp computational complexity results with respect to this success measure: On one hand, for every positive IL, there exist efficient (poly-time) ILmargin successful learning algorithms. On the other hand, we prove that unless P NP, there is no algorithm that runs in time polynomial in the sample size and in 1/ IL that is ILmargin successful for all IL O. 1 Introduction We consider the computational complexity of learning linear perceptrons for arbitrary (Le.

It has been shown that the receptive fields of simple cells in VI can be explained by assuming optimal encoding, provided that an extra constraint of sparseness is added. This finding suggests that there is a reason, independent of optimal representation, for sparseness. However this work used an ad hoc model for the noise. Here I show that, if a biologically more plausible noise model, describing neurons as Poisson processes, is used sparseness does not have to be added as a constraint. Thus I conclude that sparseness is not a feature that evolution has striven for, but is simply the result of the evolutionary pressure towards an optimal representation.

We explore the statistical properties of natural sound stimuli preprocessed with a bank of linear filters. The responses of such filters exhibit a striking form of statistical dependency, in which the response variance of each filter grows with the response amplitude of filters tuned for nearby frequencies. These dependencies may be substantially reduced using an operation known as divisive normalization, in which the response of each filter is divided by a weighted sum of the rectified responses of other filters. The weights may be chosen to maximize the independence of the normalized responses for an ensemble of natural sounds. We demonstrate that the resulting model accounts for nonlinearities in the response characteristics of the auditory nerve, by comparing model simulations to electrophysiological recordings.

This basic question in the theory of knowledge seems to be beyond the scope of experimental investigation. An accessible version of this question is whether different observers of the same sense data have the same neural representation of these data: how much of the neural code is universal, and how much is individual? Differences in the neural codes of different individuals may arise from various sources: First, different individuals may use different'vocabularies' of coding symbols. Second, they may use the same symbols to encode different stimulus features. Third, they may have different latencies, so they'say' the same things at slightly different times.

The model structure is an abstrac- tion of the hippocampus or the olfactory cortex. We propose a simple generalized Hebbian rule, using temporal-activity-dependent LTP and LTD, to encode both magnitudes and phases of oscillatory patterns into the synapses in the network. After learning, the model responds resonantly to inputs which have been learned (or, for networks which operate essentially linearly, to linear combinations of learned inputs), but negligibly to other input patterns. Encoding both amplitude and phase enhances computational capacity, for which the price is having to learn both the excitatory-to-excitatory and the excitatory-to-inhibitory connections. Our model puts contraints on the form of the learning kernal A(r) that should be experimenally observed, e.g., for small oscillation frequencies, it requires that the overall LTP dominates the overall LTD, but this requirement should be modified if the stored oscillations are of high frequencies.

Experimental data show that biological synapses behave quite differently from the symbolic synapses in common artificial neural network models. Biological synapses are dynamic, i.e., their "weight" changes on a short time scale by several hundred percent in dependence of the past input to the synapse. In this article we explore the consequences that these synaptic dynamics entail for the computational power of feedforward neural networks. We show that gradient descent suffices to approximate a given (quadratic) filter by a rather small neural system with dynamic synapses. We also compare our network model to artificial neural networks designed for time series processing. Our numerical results are complemented by theoretical analysis which show that even with just a single hidden layer such networks can approximate a surprisingly large large class of nonlinear filters: all filters that can be characterized by Volterra series. This result is robust with regard to various changes in the model for synaptic dynamics.