Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1410.1029 v4 pith:UQ6RAOGV submitted 2014-10-04 q-bio.NC

Synaptic plasticity as Bayesian inference

classification q-bio.NC
keywords learningtheyweightssynapticuncertaintyvariabilitybayesianinference
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Learning, especially rapid learning, is critical for survival. However, learning is hard: a large number of synaptic weights must be set based on noisy, often ambiguous, sensory information. In such a high-noise regime, keeping track of probability distributions over weights is the optimal strategy. Here we hypothesize that synapses take that strategy; in essence, when they estimate weights, they include error bars. They then use that uncertainty to adjust their learning rates, with more uncertain weights having higher learning rates. We also make a second, independent, hypothesis: synapses communicate their uncertainty by linking it to variability in PSP size, with more uncertainty leading to more variability. These two hypotheses cast synaptic plasticity as a problem of Bayesian inference, and thus provide a normative view of learning. They generalize known learning rules, offer an explanation for the large variability in the size of post-synaptic potentials, and make falsifiable experimental predictions.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.