Hebbian theory is a neuropsychological theory claiming that an increase in synaptic efficacy arises from a presynaptic cell's repeated and persistent stimulation of a postsynaptic cell. It is an attempt to explain synaptic plasticity, the adaptation of neurons during the learning process. Hebbian theory was introduced by Donald Hebb in his 1949 book The Organization of Behavior. The theory is also called Hebb's rule, Hebb's law, Hebb's postulate, and cell assembly theory. Hebb states it as follows: Let us assume that the persistence or repetition of a reverberatory activity (or "trace") tends to induce lasting cellular changes that add to its stability. ... When an axon of cell A is near enough to excite a cell B and repeatedly or persistently takes part in firing it, some growth process or metabolic change takes place in one or both cells such that A's efficiency, as one of the cells firing B, is increased. The theory is often summarized as "Neurons that fire together, wire together." However, Hebb emphasized that cell A needs to "take part in firing" cell B, and such causality can occur only if cell A fires just before, not at the same time as, cell B. This aspect of causation in Hebb's work foreshadowed what is now known about spike-timing-dependent plasticity, which requires temporal precedence. Hebbian theory attempts to explain associative or Hebbian learning, in which simultaneous activation of cells leads to pronounced increases in synaptic strength between those cells. It also provides a biological basis for errorless learning methods for education and memory rehabilitation. In the study of neural networks in cognitive function, it is often regarded as the neuronal basis of unsupervised learning. == Engrams, cell assembly theory, and learning == Hebbian theory provides an explanation for how neurons might connect to become engrams, which may be stored in overlapping cell assemblies, or groups of neurons that encode specific information. Initially created as a way to explain recurrent activity in specific groups of cortical neurons, Hebb's theories on the form and function of cell assemblies can be understood from the following: The general idea is an old one, that any two cells or systems of cells that are repeatedly active at the same time will tend to become 'associated' so that activity in one facilitates activity in the other. Hebb also wrote: When one cell repeatedly assists in firing another, the axon of the first cell develops synaptic knobs (or enlarges them if they already exist) in contact with the soma of the second cell. D. Alan Allport posits additional ideas regarding cell assembly theory and its role in forming engrams using the concept of auto-association, or the brain's ability to retrieve information based on a partial cue, described as follows: If the inputs to a system cause the same pattern of activity to occur repeatedly, the set of active elements constituting that pattern will become increasingly strongly inter-associated. That is, each element will tend to turn on every other element and (with negative weights) to turn off the elements that do not form part of the pattern. To put it another way, the pattern as a whole will become 'auto-associated'. We may call a learned (auto-associated) pattern an engram. Research conducted in the laboratory of Nobel laureate Eric Kandel has provided evidence supporting the role of Hebbian learning mechanisms at synapses in the marine gastropod Aplysia californica. Because synapses in the peripheral nervous system of marine invertebrates are much easier to control in experiments, Kandel's research found that Hebbian long-term potentiation along with activity-dependent presynaptic facilitation are both necessary for synaptic plasticity and classical conditioning in Aplysia californica. While research on invertebrates has established fundamental mechanisms of learning and memory, much of the work on long-lasting synaptic changes between vertebrate neurons involves the use of non-physiological experimental stimulation of brain cells. However, some of the physiologically relevant synapse modification mechanisms that have been studied in vertebrate brains do seem to be examples of Hebbian processes. One such review indicates that long-lasting changes in synaptic strengths can be induced by physiologically relevant synaptic activity using both Hebbian and non-Hebbian mechanisms. == Principles == In artificial neurons and artificial neural networks, Hebb's principle can be described as a method of determining how to alter the weights between model neurons. The weight between two neurons increases if the two neurons activate simultaneously, and reduces if they activate separately. Nodes that tend to be either both positive or both negative at the same time have strong positive weights, while those that tend to be opposite have strong negative weights. The following is a formulaic description of Hebbian learning (many other descriptions are possible): w i j = x i x j , {\displaystyle \,w_{ij}=x_{i}x_{j},} where w i j {\displaystyle w_{ij}} is the weight of the connection from neuron j {\displaystyle j} to neuron i {\displaystyle i} , and x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} is the input for neuron i {\displaystyle i} . This is an example of pattern learning, where weights are updated after every training example. In a Hopfield network, connections w i j {\displaystyle w_{ij}} are set to zero if i = j {\displaystyle i=j} (no reflexive connections allowed). With binary neurons (activations either 0 or 1), connections would be set to 1 if the connected neurons have the same activation for a pattern. When several training patterns are used, the expression becomes an average of the individuals: w i j = 1 p ∑ k = 1 p x i k x j k , {\displaystyle w_{ij}={\frac {1}{p}}\sum _{k=1}^{p}x_{i}^{k}x_{j}^{k},} where w i j {\displaystyle w_{ij}} is the weight of the connection from neuron j {\displaystyle j} to neuron i {\displaystyle i} , p {\displaystyle p} is the number of training patterns and x i k {\displaystyle x_{i}^{k}} the k {\displaystyle k} -th input for neuron i {\displaystyle i} . This is learning by epoch, with weights updated after all the training examples are presented and is last term applicable to both discrete and continuous training sets. Again, in a Hopfield network, connections w i j {\displaystyle w_{ij}} are set to zero if i = j {\displaystyle i=j} (no reflexive connections). A variation of Hebbian learning that takes into account phenomena such as blocking and other neural learning phenomena is the mathematical model of Harry Klopf. Klopf's model assumes that parts of a system with simple adaptive mechanisms can underlie more complex systems with more advanced adaptive behavior, such as neural networks. == Relationship to unsupervised learning, stability, and generalization == Because of the simple nature of Hebbian learning, based only on the coincidence of pre- and post-synaptic activity, it may not be intuitively clear why this form of plasticity leads to meaningful learning. However, it can be shown that Hebbian plasticity does pick up the statistical properties of the input in a way that can be categorized as unsupervised learning. This can be mathematically shown in a simplified example. Let us work under the simplifying assumption of a single rate-based neuron of rate y ( t ) {\displaystyle y(t)} , whose inputs have rates x 1 ( t ) . . . x N ( t ) {\displaystyle x_{1}(t)...x_{N}(t)} . The response of the neuron y ( t ) {\displaystyle y(t)} is usually described as a linear combination of its input, ∑ i w i x i {\displaystyle \sum _{i}w_{i}x_{i}} , followed by a response function f {\displaystyle f} : y = f ( ∑ i = 1 N w i x i ) . {\displaystyle y=f\left(\sum _{i=1}^{N}w_{i}x_{i}\right).} As defined in the previous sections, Hebbian plasticity describes the evolution in time of the synaptic weight w {\displaystyle w} : d w i d t = η x i y . {\displaystyle {\frac {dw_{i}}{dt}}=\eta x_{i}y.} Assuming, for simplicity, an identity response function f ( a ) = a {\displaystyle f(a)=a} , we can write d w i d t = η x i ∑ j = 1 N w j x j {\displaystyle {\frac {dw_{i}}{dt}}=\eta x_{i}\sum _{j=1}^{N}w_{j}x_{j}} or in matrix form: d w d t = η x x T w . {\displaystyle {\frac {d\mathbf {w} }{dt}}=\eta \mathbf {x} \mathbf {x} ^{T}\mathbf {w} .} As in the previous chapter, if training by epoch is done an average ⟨ … ⟩ {\displaystyle \langle \dots \rangle } over discrete or continuous (time) training set of x {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} } can be done: d w d t = ⟨ η x x T w ⟩ = η ⟨ x x T ⟩ w = η C w . {\displaystyle {\frac {d\mathbf {w} }{dt}}=\langle \eta \mathbf {x} \mathbf {x} ^{T}\mathbf {w} \rangle =\eta \langle \mathbf {x} \mathbf {x} ^{T}\rangle \mathbf {w} =\eta C\mathbf {w} .} where C = ⟨ x x T ⟩ {\displaystyle C=\langle \,\mathbf {x} \mathbf {x} ^{T}\rangle } is the correlation matrix of the input under the additional assumption that ⟨ x ⟩ = 0 {\displaystyle \langle \mathbf
Read more →
