A Neural Network Architecture for Autonomous Learning, Recognition, and Prediction in a Nonstationary World

In a constantly changing world, humans are adapted to alternate routinely between attending to familiar objects and testing hypotheses about novel ones. We can rapidly learn to recognize and narne novel objects without unselectively disrupting our memories of familiar ones. We can notice fine details that differentiate nearly identical objects and generalize across broad classes of dissimilar objects. This chapter describes a class of self-organizing neural network architectures--called ARTMAP-- that are capable of fast, yet stable, on-line recognition learning, hypothesis testing, and naming in response to an arbitrary stream of input patterns (Carpenter, Grossberg, Markuzon, Reynolds, and Rosen, 1992; Carpenter, Grossberg, and Reynolds, 1991). The intrinsic stability of ARTMAP allows the system to learn incrementally for an unlimited period of time. System stability properties can be traced to the structure of its learned memories, which encode clusters of attended features into its recognition categories, rather than slow averages of category inputs. The level of detail in the learned attentional focus is determined moment-by-moment, depending on predictive success: an error due to over-generalization automatically focuses attention on additional input details enough of which are learned in a new recognition category so that the predictive error will not be repeated. An ARTMAP system creates an evolving map between a variable number of learned categories that compress one feature space (e.g., visual features) to learned categories of another feature space (e.g., auditory features). Input vectors can be either binary or analog. Computational properties of the networks enable them to perform significantly better in benchmark studies than alternative machine learning, genetic algorithm, or neural network models. Some of the critical problems that challenge and constrain any such autonomous learning system will next be illustrated. Design principles that work together to solve these problems are then outlined. These principles are realized in the ARTMAP architecture, which is specified as an algorithm. Finally, ARTMAP dynamics are illustrated by means of a series of benchmark simulations.

Hippocampal Modulation of Recognition, Conditioning, Timing, and Space: Why So Many Functions?

Advanced Research Projects Agency (ONR N00014-92-J-4015); National Science Foundation (IRI-90-24877); Office of Naval Research (N00014-91-J-1309)

3-D Object Recognition by the ART-EMAP Evidence Accumulation Network

ART-EMAP synthesizes adaptive resonance theory (AHT) and spatial and temporal evidence integration for dynamic predictive mapping (EMAP). The network extends the capabilities of fuzzy ARTMAP in four incremental stages. Stage I introduces distributed pattern representation at a view category field. Stage 2 adds a decision criterion to the mapping between view and object categories, delaying identification of ambiguous objects when faced with a low confidence prediction. Stage 3 augments the system with a field where evidence accumulates in medium-term memory (MTM). Stage 4 adds an unsupervised learning process to fine-tune performance after the limited initial period of supervised network training. Simulations of the four ART-EMAP stages demonstrate performance on a difficult 3-D object recognition problem.

The Hippocampus and Cerebellum in Adaptively Timed Learning, Recognition, and Movement

The concepts of declarative memory and procedural memory have been used to distinguish two basic types of learning. A neural network model suggests how such memory processes work together as recognition learning, reinforcement learning, and sensory-motor learning take place during adaptive behaviors. To coordinate these processes, the hippocampal formation and cerebellum each contain circuits that learn to adaptively time their outputs. Within the model, hippocampal timing helps to maintain attention on motivationally salient goal objects during variable task-related delays, and cerebellar timing controls the release of conditioned responses. This property is part of the model's description of how cognitive-emotional interactions focus attention on motivationally valued cues, and how this process breaks down due to hippocampal ablation. The model suggests that the hippocampal mechanisms that help to rapidly draw attention to salient cues could prematurely release motor commands were not the release of these commands adaptively timed by the cerebellum. The model hippocampal system modulates cortical recognition learning without actually encoding the representational information that the cortex encodes. These properties avoid the difficulties faced by several models that propose a direct hippocampal role in recognition learning. Learning within the model hippocampal system controls adaptive timing and spatial orientation. Model properties hereby clarify how hippocampal ablations cause amnesic symptoms and difficulties with tasks which combine task delays, novelty detection, and attention towards goal objects amid distractions. When these model recognition, reinforcement, sensory-motor, and timing processes work together, they suggest how the brain can accomplish conditioning of multiple sensory events to delayed rewards, as during serial compound conditioning.