Forming accurate memory of sequential stimuli is a fundamental function of biological agents. However, the computational mechanism underlying sequential memory in the brain remains unclear. Inspired by neuroscience theories and recent successes in applying predictive coding (PC) to \emph{static} memory tasks, in this work we propose a novel PC-based model for \emph{sequential} memory, called \emph{temporal predictive coding} (tPC). We show that our tPC models can memorize and retrieve sequential inputs accurately with a biologically plausible neural implementation. Importantly, our analytical study reveals that tPC can be viewed as a classical Asymmetric Hopfield Network (AHN) with an implicit statistical whitening process, which leads to more stable performance in sequential memory tasks of structured inputs. Moreover, we find that tPC exhibits properties consistent with behavioral observations and theories in neuroscience, thereby strengthening its biological relevance. Our work establishes a possible computational mechanism underlying sequential memory in the brain that can also be theoretically interpreted using existing memory model frameworks.

Recently, deep feedforward neural networks have achieved considerable success in modeling biological sensory processing, in terms of reproducing the input-output map of sensory neurons. However, such models raise profound questions about the very nature of explanation in neuroscience. Are we simply replacing one complex system (a biological circuit) with another (a deep network), without understanding either? Moreover, beyond neural representations, are the deep network's computational mechanisms for generating neural responses the same as those in the brain? Without a systematic approach to extracting and understanding computational mechanisms from deep neural network models, it can be difficult both to assess the degree of utility of deep learning approaches in neuroscience, and to extract experimentally testable hypotheses from deep networks. We develop such a systematic approach by combining dimensionality reduction and modern attribution methods for determining the relative importance of interneurons for specific visual computations. We apply this approach to deep network models of the retina, revealing a conceptual understanding of how the retina acts as a predictive feature extractor that signals deviations from expectations for diverse spatiotemporal stimuli. For each stimulus, our extracted computational mechanisms are consistent with prior scientific literature, and in one case yields a new mechanistic hypothesis. Thus overall, this work not only yields insights into the computational mechanisms underlying the striking predictive capabilities of the retina, but also places the framework of deep networks as neuroscientific models on firmer theoretical foundations, by providing a new roadmap to go beyond comparing neural representations to extracting and understand computational mechanisms.

Moreover, beyond neural representations, are the deep network's computational mechanisms for generating neural responses the same as those in the brain?

Our contributions can be summarized in three steps: first, we verify the consistency of LINT by applying it to data simulated from lrRNNs, and show that it recovers the effective part of the connectivity that reproduces the dynamics and computations.

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

Most written natural languages are composed of sequences of words and sentences. Similar to humans, large language models (LLMs) exhibit flexibility in handling textual positions - a phenomenon we term position generalization. They can understand texts with position perturbations and generalize to longer texts than those encountered during training with the latest techniques. These phenomena suggest that LLMs handle positions tolerantly, but how LLMs computationally process positional relevance remains largely unexplored. This work connects the linguistic phenomenon with LLMs' computational mechanisms. We show how LLMs enforce certain computational mechanisms for the aforementioned tolerance in position perturbations. Despite the complex design of the self-attention mechanism, this work reveals that LLMs learn a counterintuitive disentanglement of attention logits. Their values show a 0.959 linear correlation with an approximation of the arithmetic sum of positional relevance and semantic importance. Furthermore, we identify a prevalent pattern in intermediate features, which we prove theoretically enables this effect. The pattern, which is different from how randomly initialized parameters would behave, suggests that it is a learned behavior rather than a natural result of the model architecture. Based on these findings, we provide computational explanations and criteria for LLMs' position flexibilities. This work takes a pioneering step in linking position generalization with modern LLMs' internal mechanisms.

This manuscript aims to attack an interesting problem, namely how could one obtain mechanistic insights from the CNN model fit to the neural responses. The writing is generally clear, although it would benefit to tone down some of the statements to more accurately reflect the real contributions. Overall, the manuscript could be an interesting contribution to the field. However, I am skeptical about various claims made in the paper. The main issues I have with this manuscript are three-fold: 1.the results is rather incremental relatively to ref [2] and [9,10].

Forming accurate memory of sequential stimuli is a fundamental function of biological agents. However, the computational mechanism underlying sequential memory in the brain remains unclear. Inspired by neuroscience theories and recent successes in applying predictive coding (PC) to \emph{static} memory tasks, in this work we propose a novel PC-based model for \emph{sequential} memory, called \emph{temporal predictive coding} (tPC). We show that our tPC models can memorize and retrieve sequential inputs accurately with a biologically plausible neural implementation. Importantly, our analytical study reveals that tPC can be viewed as a classical Asymmetric Hopfield Network (AHN) with an implicit statistical whitening process, which leads to more stable performance in sequential memory tasks of structured inputs.

Recently, deep feedforward neural networks have achieved considerable success in modeling biological sensory processing, in terms of reproducing the input-output map of sensory neurons. However, such models raise profound questions about the very nature of explanation in neuroscience. Are we simply replacing one complex system (a biological circuit) with another (a deep network), without understanding either? Moreover, beyond neural representations, are the deep network's computational mechanisms for generating neural responses the same as those in the brain? Without a systematic approach to extracting and understanding computational mechanisms from deep neural network models, it can be difficult both to assess the degree of utility of deep learning approaches in neuroscience, and to extract experimentally testable hypotheses from deep networks.