Learning rule influences recurrent network representations but not attractor structure in decision-making tasks
Brandon McMahan, Michael Kleinman, Jonathan C. Kao
Abstract
Recurrent neural networks (RNNs) are popular tools for studying computational dynamics in neurobiological circuits. However, due to the dizzying array of design choices, it is unclear if computational dynamics unearthed from RNNs provide reliable neurobiological inferences. Understanding the effects of design choices on RNN computation is valuable in two ways. First, invariant properties that persist in RNNs across a wide range of design choices are more likely to be candidate neurobiological mechanisms. Second, understanding what design choices lead to similar dynamical solutions reduces the burden of imposing that all design choices be totally faithful replications of biology. We focus our investigation on how RNN learning rule and task design affect RNN computation. We trained large populations of RNNs with different, but commonly used, learning rules on decision-making tasks inspired by neuroscience literature. For relatively complex tasks, we find that attractor topology is invariant to the choice of learning rule, but representational geometry is not. For simple tasks, we find that attractor topology depends on task input noise. However, when a task becomes increasingly complex, RNN attractor topology becomes invariant to input noise. Together, our results suggest that RNN dynamics are robust across learning rules but can be sensitive to the training task design, especially for simpler tasks.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext ef39be9d-5681-41a7-aaab-c52359ff48afCited by top-tier papers3
- Beyond accuracy: generalization properties of bio-plausible temporal credit assignment rulesYuhan Helena Liu, Arna Ghosh, Blake A. Richards, Eric Shea-Brown et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 10 citations
- When Representations Align: Universality in Representation Learning DynamicsLoek van Rossem, Andrew M. SaxeICML 2024 · 8 citations
- RNNs perform task computations by dynamically warping neural representationsArthur Pellegrino, Angus ChadwickNeurIPS 2025 · 5 citations
Builds on1
Related papers
- Measuring and Controlling Solution Degeneracy across Task-Trained Recurrent Neural NetworksAnn Huang, Satpreet Harcharan Singh, Flavio Martinelli, Kanaka RajanNeurIPS 2025 · 22 citations
- Discovering alternative solutions beyond the simplicity bias in recurrent neural networksWilliam Qian, Cengiz PehlevanICLR 2026 · 5 citations
- The Simplicity Bias in Multi-Task RNNs: Shared Attractors, Reuse of Dynamics, and Geometric RepresentationElia Turner, Omri BarakNeurIPS 2023 · 25 citations
- Implementing Inductive bias for different navigation tasks through diverse RNN attrractorsTie Xu, Omri BarakICLR 2020 · 6 citations
- Flow-field inference from neural data using deep recurrent networksTimothy Doyeon Kim, Thomas Zhihao Luo, Tankut Can, Kamesh Krishnamurthy et al.ICML 2025
