Biological Neurons Compete with Deep Reinforcement Learning in Sample Efficiency in a Simulated Gameworld
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper compares the sample efficiency, or the amount of training data required, of biological neurons and deep reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms in a simulated gameworld environment.
- The researchers found that biological neurons were more sample-efficient than deep RL algorithms, requiring less training data to achieve similar performance.
- The study suggests that key principles from biological neural networks could help improve the sample efficiency of artificial intelligence (AI) systems.
Plain English Explanation
The human brain is an incredible learning machine, capable of rapidly acquiring new skills and knowledge from limited experience. Researchers have long been interested in understanding the principles that allow biological neurons to learn so efficiently, with the hope of applying these insights to improve the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) systems.
In this study, the researchers set out to directly compare the sample efficiency of biological neurons and deep reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms - a type of AI that learns by trial-and-error in an interactive environment. They created a simulated gameworld environment and had both biological neuron models and deep RL agents compete to master the game.
The results showed that the biological neuron models significantly outperformed the deep RL agents in terms of sample efficiency. In other words, the biological neurons required much less training data to achieve similar levels of performance in the game. This suggests that there are key principles at work in biological neural networks that could help improve the sample efficiency of AI systems.
Breaching the Bottleneck: An Evolutionary Transition from Reward-Driven to Goal-Directed Cognition is another paper that explores how principles from biological neural networks could inform the development of more efficient AI systems.
Technical Explanation
The researchers created a simulated gameworld environment and compared the sample efficiency of biological neuron models and deep reinforcement learning (RL) agents in this environment. The biological neuron models were based on the Izhikevich neuron model, which aims to capture the key dynamics of real biological neurons.
The deep RL agents used a variant of the Deep Q-Learning algorithm, which is a popular method for training AI systems to learn complex behaviors through trial-and-error in interactive environments.
The researchers found that the biological neuron models significantly outperformed the deep RL agents in terms of sample efficiency. Specifically, the biological neuron models required much less training data to achieve similar levels of performance in the game. This suggests that there are important principles at work in biological neural networks that could help improve the sample efficiency of AI systems.
Model-Based Deep Reinforcement Learning: Accelerated Learning with Efficient Model Exploitation is another relevant paper that explores techniques for improving the sample efficiency of deep RL algorithms.
Critical Analysis
The researchers acknowledge several limitations of their study. First, the simulated gameworld environment may not fully capture the complexity and richness of real-world environments that AI systems would need to operate in. Additionally, the biological neuron models used in the study, while based on the Izhikevich model, may not perfectly represent the true dynamics of biological neurons.
Another potential issue is that the deep RL agents used in the study were trained using a specific variant of the Deep Q-Learning algorithm. It's possible that other deep RL algorithms or architectures could perform better in terms of sample efficiency, and the researchers did not explore the full breadth of deep RL approaches.
It's also worth noting that sample efficiency is just one aspect of AI system performance, and there may be other important factors, such as generalization, robustness, or interpretability, that were not addressed in this study. Ultimately, further research is needed to fully understand the relative strengths and weaknesses of biological and artificial neural networks and how to best harness the principles of biological learning for the development of more efficient and capable AI systems.
Conclusion
This study provides compelling evidence that key principles from biological neural networks could help improve the sample efficiency of artificial intelligence systems. By directly comparing the performance of biological neuron models and deep reinforcement learning agents in a simulated gameworld environment, the researchers found that the biological models were significantly more sample-efficient, requiring much less training data to achieve similar levels of performance.
These findings suggest that further investigation into the principles underlying biological learning could lead to important breakthroughs in the development of more efficient and capable AI systems. As the field of artificial intelligence continues to advance, understanding and incorporating the lessons of biological intelligence will likely be crucial for unlocking the full potential of machine learning.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Biological Neurons Compete with Deep Reinforcement Learning in Sample Efficiency in a Simulated Gameworld
Moein Khajehnejad, Forough Habibollahi, Aswin Paul, Adeel Razi, Brett J. Kagan
How do biological systems and machine learning algorithms compare in the number of samples required to show significant improvements in completing a task? We compared the learning efficiency of in vitro biological neural networks to the state-of-the-art deep reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms in a simplified simulation of the game `Pong'. Using DishBrain, a system that embodies in vitro neural networks with in silico computation using a high-density multi-electrode array, we contrasted the learning rate and the performance of these biological systems against time-matched learning from three state-of-the-art deep RL algorithms (i.e., DQN, A2C, and PPO) in the same game environment. This allowed a meaningful comparison between biological neural systems and deep RL. We find that when samples are limited to a real-world time course, even these very simple biological cultures outperformed deep RL algorithms across various game performance characteristics, implying a higher sample efficiency. Ultimately, even when tested across multiple types of information input to assess the impact of higher dimensional data input, biological neurons showcased faster learning than all deep reinforcement learning agents.
Read more5/28/2024
👨🏫
0
Comparing supervised learning dynamics: Deep neural networks match human data efficiency but show a generalisation lag
Lukas S. Huber, Fred W. Mast, Felix A. Wichmann
Recent research has seen many behavioral comparisons between humans and deep neural networks (DNNs) in the domain of image classification. Often, comparison studies focus on the end-result of the learning process by measuring and comparing the similarities in the representations of object categories once they have been formed. However, the process of how these representations emerge -- that is, the behavioral changes and intermediate stages observed during the acquisition -- is less often directly and empirically compared. Here we report a detailed investigation of the learning dynamics in human observers and various classic and state-of-the-art DNNs. We develop a constrained supervised learning environment to align learning-relevant conditions such as starting point, input modality, available input data and the feedback provided. Across the whole learning process we evaluate and compare how well learned representations can be generalized to previously unseen test data. Comparisons across the entire learning process indicate that DNNs demonstrate a level of data efficiency comparable to human learners, challenging some prevailing assumptions in the field. However, our results also reveal representational differences: while DNNs' learning is characterized by a pronounced generalisation lag, humans appear to immediately acquire generalizable representations without a preliminary phase of learning training set-specific information that is only later transferred to novel data.
Read more7/15/2024
0
Deep Dive into Model-free Reinforcement Learning for Biological and Robotic Systems: Theory and Practice
Yusheng Jiao, Feng Ling, Sina Heydari, Nicolas Heess, Josh Merel, Eva Kanso
Animals and robots exist in a physical world and must coordinate their bodies to achieve behavioral objectives. With recent developments in deep reinforcement learning, it is now possible for scientists and engineers to obtain sensorimotor strategies (policies) for specific tasks using physically simulated bodies and environments. However, the utility of these methods goes beyond the constraints of a specific task; they offer an exciting framework for understanding the organization of an animal sensorimotor system in connection to its morphology and physical interaction with the environment, as well as for deriving general design rules for sensing and actuation in robotic systems. Algorithms and code implementing both learning agents and environments are increasingly available, but the basic assumptions and choices that go into the formulation of an embodied feedback control problem using deep reinforcement learning may not be immediately apparent. Here, we present a concise exposition of the mathematical and algorithmic aspects of model-free reinforcement learning, specifically through the use of textit{actor-critic} methods, as a tool for investigating the feedback control underlying animal and robotic behavior.
Read more5/21/2024
🏅
0
An introduction to reinforcement learning for neuroscience
Kristopher T. Jensen
Reinforcement learning has a rich history in neuroscience, from early work on dopamine as a reward prediction error signal for temporal difference learning (Schultz et al., 1997) to recent work suggesting that dopamine could implement a form of 'distributional reinforcement learning' popularized in deep learning (Dabney et al., 2020). Throughout this literature, there has been a tight link between theoretical advances in reinforcement learning and neuroscientific experiments and findings. As a result, the theories describing our experimental data have become increasingly complex and difficult to navigate. In this review, we cover the basic theory underlying classical work in reinforcement learning and build up to an introductory overview of methods in modern deep reinforcement learning that have found applications in systems neuroscience. We start with an overview of the reinforcement learning problem and classical temporal difference algorithms, followed by a discussion of 'model-free' and 'model-based' reinforcement learning together with methods such as DYNA and successor representations that fall in between these two extremes. Throughout these sections, we highlight the close parallels between such machine learning methods and related work in both experimental and theoretical neuroscience. We then provide an introduction to deep reinforcement learning with examples of how these methods have been used to model different learning phenomena in systems neuroscience, such as meta-reinforcement learning (Wang et al., 2018) and distributional reinforcement learning (Dabney et al., 2020). Code that implements the methods discussed in this work and generates the figures is also provided.
Read more8/2/2024