Incorporating rapid neocortical learning of new schema-consistent information into complementary learning systems theory.

The complementary learning systems theory of the roles of hippocampus and neocortex (McClelland, McNaughton, & O'Reilly, 1995) holds that the rapid integration of arbitrary new information into neocortical structures is avoided to prevent catastrophic interference with structured knowledge representations stored in synaptic connections among neocortical neurons. Recent studies (Tse et al., 2007, 2011) showed that neocortical circuits can rapidly acquire new associations that are consistent with prior knowledge. The findings challenge the complementary learning systems theory as previously presented. However, new simulations extending those reported in McClelland et al. (1995) show that new information that is consistent with knowledge previously acquired by a putatively cortexlike artificial neural network can be learned rapidly and without interfering with existing knowledge; it is when inconsistent new knowledge is acquired quickly that catastrophic interference ensues. Several important features of the findings of Tse et al. (2007, 2011) are captured in these simulations, indicating that the neural network model used in McClelland et al. has characteristics in common with neocortical learning mechanisms. An additional simulation generalizes beyond the network model previously used, showing how the rate of change of cortical connections can depend on prior knowledge in an arguably more biologically plausible network architecture. In sum, the findings of Tse et al. are fully consistent with the idea that hippocampus and neocortex are complementary learning systems. Taken together, these findings and the simulations reported here advance our knowledge by bringing out the role of consistency of new experience with existing knowledge and demonstrating that the rate of change of connections in real and artificial neural networks can be strongly prior-knowledge dependent.

[1]  John J. L. Morton,et al.  Interaction of information in word recognition. , 1969 .

[2]  D Marr,et al.  Simple memory: a theory for archicortex. , 1971, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[3]  R. Siegler Three aspects of cognitive development , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  J. Bransford Human Cognition: Learning, Understanding and Remembering , 1979 .

[5]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. , 1981 .

[6]  Charles E. Caton,et al.  Semantic and Conceptual Development: An Ontological Perspective , 1982 .

[7]  C. Mervis,et al.  Order of acquisition of subordinate-, basic-, and superordinate-level categories. , 1982 .

[8]  E. Bienenstock,et al.  Theory for the development of neuron selectivity: orientation specificity and binocular interaction in visual cortex , 1982, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[9]  R. Nosofsky American Psychological Association, Inc. Choice, Similarity, and the Context Theory of Classification , 2022 .

[10]  S. Carey Conceptual Change in Childhood , 1985 .

[11]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  A Learning Algorithm for Boltzmann Machines , 1985, Cogn. Sci..

[12]  David Zipser,et al.  Feature Discovery by Competive Learning , 1986, Cogn. Sci..

[13]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Learning representations by back-propagating errors , 1986, Nature.

[14]  E. Markman,et al.  Categories and induction in young children , 1986, Cognition.

[15]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Learning Representations by Recirculation , 1987, NIPS.

[16]  B. McNaughton,et al.  Hippocampal synaptic enhancement and information storage within a distributed memory system , 1987, Trends in Neurosciences.

[17]  James L. McClelland Parallel Distributed Processing: Implications for Cognition and Development , 1988 .

[18]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Explorations in parallel distributed processing: a handbook of models, programs, and exercises , 1988 .

[19]  J. Mandler,et al.  The cradle of categorization: Is the basic level basic? , 1988 .

[20]  Duane DeSieno,et al.  Adding a conscience to competitive learning , 1988, IEEE 1988 International Conference on Neural Networks.

[21]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: part 1.: an account of basic findings , 1988 .

[22]  N. Cohen,et al.  The impaired learning of semantic knowledge following bilateral medial temporal-lobe resection , 1988, Brain and Cognition.

[23]  R. Sutherland,et al.  Configural association theory: The role of the hippocampal formation in learning, memory, and amnesia , 1989, Psychobiology.

[24]  Michael McCloskey,et al.  Catastrophic Interference in Connectionist Networks: The Sequential Learning Problem , 1989 .

[25]  R. Morris Parallel Distributed Processing: Implications for Psychology and Neurobiology , 1990 .

[26]  David E. Rumelhart,et al.  Brain style computation: learning and generalization , 1990 .

[27]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  A more biologically plausible learning rule for neural networks. , 1991, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  Max R. Bennett,et al.  Probabilistic secretion of quanta in the central nervous system: granule cell synaptic control of pattern separation and activity regulation. , 1991, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[29]  J. F. Macario,et al.  Young children's use of color in classification: Foods and canonically colored objects , 1991 .

[30]  E T Rolls,et al.  Computational constraints suggest the need for two distinct input systems to the hippocampal CA3 network , 1992, Hippocampus.

[31]  Peter M. Todd,et al.  Learning and connectionist representations , 1993 .

[32]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Hippocampal conjunctive encoding, storage, and recall: Avoiding a trade‐off , 1994, Hippocampus.

[33]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory. , 1995, Psychological review.

[34]  J. Hodges,et al.  Charting the progression in semantic dementia: implications for the organisation of semantic memory. , 1995 .

[35]  J. Hodges,et al.  Charting the progression in semantic dementia: implications for the organisation of semantic memory. , 1995, Memory.

[36]  Randall C. O'Reilly,et al.  Biologically Plausible Error-Driven Learning Using Local Activation Differences: The Generalized Recirculation Algorithm , 1996, Neural Computation.

[37]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Considerations arising from a complementary learning systems perspective on hippocampus and neocortex , 1996, Hippocampus.

[38]  R. O’Reilly,et al.  Conjunctive representations in learning and memory: principles of cortical and hippocampal function. , 2001, Psychological review.

[39]  R. O’Reilly,et al.  Modeling hippocampal and neocortical contributions to recognition memory: a complementary-learning-systems approach. , 2003, Psychological review.

[40]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Structure and deterioration of semantic memory: a neuropsychological and computational investigation. , 2004, Psychological review.

[41]  S. Grossberg,et al.  Adaptive pattern classification and universal recoding: I. Parallel development and coding of neural feature detectors , 1976, Biological Cybernetics.

[42]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Semantic Cognition: A Parallel Distributed Processing Approach , 2004 .

[43]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Graded State Machines: The Representation of Temporal Contingencies in Simple Recurrent Networks , 2005, Machine Learning.

[44]  Lori L. Holt,et al.  Are there interactive processes in speech perception? , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[45]  Kenneth A. Norman,et al.  How Inhibitory Oscillations Can Train Neural Networks and Punish Competitors , 2006, Neural Computation.

[46]  Elizabeth Jefferies,et al.  Presemantic Cognition in Semantic Dementia: Six Deficits in Search of an Explanation , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[47]  Harel Z. Shouval,et al.  Models of synaptic plasticity , 2007, Scholarpedia.

[48]  Dorothy Tse,et al.  References and Notes Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Figs. S1 to S5 Tables S1 to S3 Electron Impact (ei) Mass Spectra Chemical Ionization (ci) Mass Spectra References Schemas and Memory Consolidation Research Articles Research Articles Research Articles Research Articles , 2022 .

[49]  James L. McClelland,et al.  A single-system account of semantic and lexical deficits in five semantic dementia patients , 2008, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[50]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Précis of Semantic Cognition: A Parallel Distributed Processing Approach , 2008, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[51]  Max Coltheart,et al.  Cognitive Neuropsychology , 2014, Scholarpedia.

[52]  J. Isaacson,et al.  Odor Representations in Olfactory Cortex: “Sparse” Coding, Global Inhibition, and Oscillations , 2009, Neuron.

[53]  Jeffrey S Bowers,et al.  On the biological plausibility of grandmother cells: implications for neural network theories in psychology and neuroscience. , 2009, Psychological review.

[54]  C. Poo,et al.  Odor representations in olfactory cortex , 2010 .

[55]  Dorothy Tse,et al.  Schema-Dependent Gene Activation and Memory Encoding in Neocortex , 2011, Science.

[56]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Generalization Through the Recurrent Interaction of Episodic Memories , 2012, Psychological review.

[57]  Mark F. Bear,et al.  The BCM theory of synapse modification at 30: interaction of theory with experiment , 2012, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[58]  Loyal Jones,et al.  Remembering , 1975, IEEE Power Engineering Review.

[59]  F. Keil Semantic and Conceptual Development: An Ontological Perspective , 2014 .