Featured Share Your Research
If Neural Networks Are Allowed To Sleep And Dream, Their Performance Sensibly Increases | Science Trends

If Neural Networks Are Allowed To Sleep And Dream, Their Performance Sensibly Increases

The harmonic oscillator for associative memory and pattern recognition in Artificial Intelligence is certainly the Hopfield model [1] (or, equivalently [2], its dual representation, i.e. the Restricted Boltzmann Machine (RBM) [3]). In a nutshell, we can store information (consisting in a set of P digital words or -generally speaking- patterns of information) by suitably modifying the synaptic interactions among neurons in the Hopfield neural network by means of the so-called Hebbian learning (or by using contrastive divergence algorithms for training RBMs).

However, since the seminal AGS theory [5], we know that -for this model- the critical capacity αc (namely the maximal amount of patterns Pmax a network equipped with N neurons can handle, i.e. αc = Pmax/N), is αc ∼ 0.14. On the other side, general information theoretical considerations (i.e., Gardner Theory [4]) prescribe that the maximal critical capacity for networks equipped with symmetric couplings (as the Hopfield model) is precisely αc = 1 (i.e. Pmax = N), significantly better than the Hopfield case.

Recently, in our work [6], we have shown that forcing the network to sleep -namely, mathematically implementing dreaming processes (mimicking slow wave sleep (SWS) and random eye movements (REM) phases in real mammal’s brain), after a proper rest the Hopfield model has impressive enhanced skills. In particular, it reaches the maximal bound for the critical storage, i.e. αc = 1, further, stored patterns are very stable configurations (technically speaking, they are free energy absolute minima) up to α ∼ 0.85 (while in standard Hopfield picture, this is true solely for α < 0.05). This is a remarkable property as, in the long time limit, any stochastic neural dynamics for the standard Hopfield model, if α > 0.05, almost surely ends up in a (spin-glass) state that does not overlap significantly with any of the stored patterns; while -if the network can sleep- this happens only for α > 0.85 conferring to network’s functionalities an enhanced robustness with respect to severe loads of patterns.

Finally, thanks to the equivalence between RBMs and Hopfield networks [2], we know that the ratio α = P/N in the Hopfield retrieval matches the ratio among the size of the hidden layer (built of P hidden neurons) over that of the visible one (build of N visible neurons) for RBMs. In the standard scenario, if the hidden layer is larger than ∼ 0.14 times the visible one, learning can be prone to over-fitting (as its dual Hopfield model would lie already outside the working regime, in the spin-glass phase). Allowing the network to sleep, we can learn without over-fitting even by keeping the two layers roughly of the same size (and this obviously allows to extract much more features from the data-sets presented to the network during the training stage).

Summarizing, we believe that in the process of cognition -while certainly learning and retrieval keep covering a pivotal role – also sleeping is mandatory for Artificial Intelligence, as it is for the biological one.

These findings are described in the article entitled Dreaming neural networks: Forgetting spurious memories and reinforcing pure ones, recently published in the journal Neural Networks.

References:

  1. J.J. Hopfield, Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 79(8):2554, (1982).
  2. A. Barra, et al., On the equivalence of Hopfield networks and Boltzmann machines, Neural Networks 34:1, (2012).
  3. D.H. Ackley, G.E. Hinton, T.J. Sejnowski, A learning algorithm for Boltzmann machines, Cognitive science 9(1):147, (1985).
  4. E. Gardner, The space of interactions in neural network models, J. Phys. A 21(1):257, (1998).
  5. D.J. Amit, H. Gutfreund, H. Sompolinsky, Storing infinite numbers of patterns in a spin-glass model of neural networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55(14):1530, (1985).
  6. A. Fachechi, E. Agliari, A. Barra, Dreaming neural networks: forgetting spurious memories and reinforcing pure ones, Neural Networks (2019) in press

About The Author

Adriano Barra

Adriano is a senior researcher in Mathematical Physics at the University of Salento. He specializes in statistical mechanics, artificial intelligence, and biological complexity.