Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2506.06904

Can Biologically Plausible Temporal Credit Assignment Rules Match BPTT for Neural Similarity? E-prop as an Example

Abstract

Understanding how the brain learns may be informed by studying biologically plausible learning rules. These rules, often approximating gradient descent learning to respect biological constraints such as locality, must meet two critical criteria to be considered an appropriate brain model: (1) good neuroscience task performance and (2) alignment with neural recordings. While extensive research has assessed the first criterion, the second remains underexamined. Employing methods such as Procrustes analysis on well-known neuroscience datasets, this study demonstrates the existence of a biologically plausible learning rule -- namely e-prop, which is based on gradient truncation and has demonstrated versatility across a wide range of tasks -- that can achieve neural data similarity comparable to Backpropagation Through Time (BPTT) when matched for task accuracy. Our findings also reveal that model architecture and initial conditions can play a more significant role in determining neural similarity than the specific learning rule. Furthermore, we observe that BPTT-trained models and their biologically plausible counterparts exhibit similar dynamical properties at comparable accuracies. These results underscore the substantial progress made in developing biologically plausible learning rules, highlighting their potential to achieve both competitive task performance and neural data similarity.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Yuhan Helena Liu, Guangyu Robert Yang, Christopher J. Cueva. 2025-06-07. Can Biologically Plausible Temporal Credit Assignment Rules Match BPTT for Neural Similarity? E-prop as an Example. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.06904

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Genetic Programming with Behaviour-based Niching for Learning Guided Local Search in Vehicle Routing Problems

Genetic Programming Guided Local Search (GPGLS) learns utility functions that guide local search for vehicle routing. Its evolving programs can have similar fitness while inducing different search behaviour, making fitness alone an incomplete basis for population diversity management. We propose GPGLS with Behaviour-based Niching (BN-GPGLS), which characterises programs through six operator-level descriptors collected during local search. A current-generation archive selects fitness-competitive, compact representatives from strata of a behaviour score. Fixed policies use archive parents continuously, whereas adaptive policies activate them using training-fitness and standardised behaviour-dispersion signals, optionally with a tree-size condition. We compare four behaviour-based variants with a no-archive GPGLS control and fitness-based niching over 30 seed-matched runs on generated 200-customer instances. BN-Adaptive achieves the best descriptive average rank on a separate 90-instance monitoring set; aggregate routing-cost differences are small. All five archive policies produce lower final-population median tree sizes than the GPGLS control, with paired Wilcoxon comparisons remaining significant after Holm adjustment. These results identify useful solution-quality and program-size trade-offs within the evaluated setting, without attributing the size reductions to behaviour representation alone.

cs.NE

DCL-GPGLS: Dynamic Curriculum Learning for Genetic Programming Guided Local Search in Large-Scale Vehicle Routing

Genetic Programming Guided Local Search (GPGLS) uses genetic programming to evolve utility functions for guided local search in large-scale vehicle routing problems (LSVRPs). Evaluating every GP individual on every training instance at every generation is expensive, so GPGLS is usually trained on small instance batches. Existing curriculum-based GPGLS orders these batches mainly by instance size. Adaptive Curriculum Learning GPGLS (ACL-GPGLS) improves training efficiency by adapting when the search moves between fixed curriculum stages, but the instance difficulty order remains predefined. We propose DCL-GPGLS, which estimates the difficulty of each training instance from the current population's solution quality and updates the estimates during evolution. Each generation then receives a batch near a scheduled difficulty level, with a correction that limits repeated selection of the same instances. Experiments on a fixed training-test split of the CVRPLIB X set show that DCL-GPGLS achieves the best observed average rank and mean test cost among six training policies. It obtains the lowest mean cost on 36 of 65 unseen test instances and is significantly better than the static feedback-derived curriculum, matched in total evaluator calls, on 6 instances, with no significant difference on the remaining 59.

cs.NE

Online Automated Algorithm Design with Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) enable automated algorithm design (AAD) through reasoning and code synthesis. However, most existing LLM-based AAD methods separate algorithm design from target optimization, deploying a fixed design even as the optimization state evolves. Conventional adaptive optimizers can respond to such changes, but their adjustments remain confined to predefined parameters, operators, or strategies. To address these limitations, we introduce online LLM-based AAD, a novel optimization paradigm that treats the algorithm itself as a state-dependent decision variable. At each stage, LLM agents synthesize an algorithm with new behavior logic from the current optimization state. Executing the generated algorithm advances the search and provides feedback for subsequent designs, coupling algorithm design with target optimization without requiring a separate offline algorithm pretraining stage. To implement this paradigm, we propose OnDesign, a multi-agent framework that reconciles competing design perspectives to synthesize executable algorithms and uses execution feedback to refine how runtime evidence is interpreted for subsequent designs. We evaluate OnDesign across two mainstream black-box optimization paradigms on three scenarios: Bayesian optimization, evolutionary continuous optimization, and evolutionary mixed-variable optimization. Extensive experiments on six benchmark suites and one engineering problem across multiple problem dimensions demonstrate superior overall performance over conventional optimizers and offline LLM-based AAD methods.

cs.NE