Skip to main content
Log in

Biologically plausible learning in neural networks: a lesson from bacterial chemotaxis

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biological Cybernetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Learning processes in the brain are usually associated with plastic changes made to optimize the strength of connections between neurons. Although many details related to biophysical mechanisms of synaptic plasticity have been discovered, it is unclear how the concurrent performance of adaptive modifications in a huge number of spatial locations is organized to minimize a given objective function. Since direct experimental observation of even a relatively small subset of such changes is not feasible, computational modeling is an indispensable investigation tool for solving this problem. However, the conventional method of error back-propagation (EBP) employed for optimizing synaptic weights in artificial neural networks is not biologically plausible. This study based on computational experiments demonstrated that such optimization can be performed rather efficiently using the same general method that bacteria employ for moving closer to an attractant or away from a repellent. With regard to neural network optimization, this method consists of regulating the probability of an abrupt change in the direction of synaptic weight modification according to the temporal gradient of the objective function. Neural networks utilizing this method (regulation of modification probability, RMP) can be viewed as analogous to swimming in the multidimensional space of their parameters in the flow of biochemical agents carrying information about the optimality criterion. The efficiency of RMP is comparable to that of EBP, while RMP has several important advantages. Since the biological plausibility of RMP is beyond a reasonable doubt, the RMP concept provides a constructive framework for the experimental analysis of learning in natural neural networks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albus JS (1971) A theory of cerebellar function. Math Biosci 10: 25–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baev KV, Shimansky YP (1992) Principles of organization of neural systems controlling automatic movements in animals. Prog Neurobiol 39: 45–112

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cauwenberghs G (1993) A fast stochastic error-descent algorithm for supervised learning and optimization. In: Advances in neural information processing systems, vol 5. Morgan Kaufman Publishers, San Mateo, CA, pp 244–251

  • Eisenbach M (2004) Chemotaxis. Imperial College Press, River Edge, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Haydon PG (2001) Glia: listening and talking to the synapse. Nat Rev Neurosci 2: 186–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houk JC, Buckingham JT, Barto AG (1996) Models of the cerebellum and motor learning. Behav Brain Sci 19: 368–383

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito M (1984) The cerebellum and neural control. Raven Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kargo WJ, Nitz DA (2004) Improvements in the signal-to-noise ratio of motor cortex cells distinguish early versus late phases of motor skill learning. J Neurosci 24: 5560–5569

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick S, Gerlatt CD Jr, Vecchi MP (1983) Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220: 671–680

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lamprecht R, LeDoux J (2004) Structural plasticity and memory. Nat Rev Neurosci 5: 45–54

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Macnab RM, Koshland DE Jr (1972) The gradient-sensing mechanism in bacterial chemotaxis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 69: 2509–2512

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marr DJ (1969) A theory of cerebellar cortex. J Physiol (Lond) 202: 437–470

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzoni P, Andersen RA, Jordan MI (1991) A more biologically plausible learning rule for neural networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 88: 4433–4437

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rumelhart DE, Hinton GE, Williams RJ (1986) Learning internal representations by error propagation. In: Rumelhart DE, McClelland JL (eds) Parallel distributed processing: explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol 1: Foundations.. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 318–362

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimansky YP (2007) Role of optimization in simple and learning-based adaptation and its biologically plausible mechanisms. In: Williams TO (eds) Biological cybernetics research trends. Nova Science Publishers, Hauppauge, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimansky YP, Kang T, He J (2004) A novel model of motor learning capable of developing an optimal movement control law online from scratch. Biol Cybern 90: 133–145

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Werbos PJ (1974) Beyond regression: new tools for prediction and analysis in the behavioral sciences. Ph.D. dissertation, Committee on Applied Mathematics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

  • Werfel J, Xie X, Seung HS (2004) Learning curves for stochastic gradient descent in linear feedforward networks. In: Thrun S, Saul L, Scholkopf B (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems, vol 16. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yury P. Shimansky.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shimansky, Y.P. Biologically plausible learning in neural networks: a lesson from bacterial chemotaxis. Biol Cybern 101, 379–385 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00422-009-0341-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00422-009-0341-6

Keywords

Navigation