The New Associationism: Lessons from Deep Learning

Modern machine learning applications employ deep neural networks training with the error backpropagation algorithm. Although this algorithm is very effective, it lacks biological realism. For example, backpropagation requires symmetric connectivity, and a separate neural processing channel for error signals. Prior works have therefore proposed a number of more realistic alternatives for error backpropagation. However, most of them still suffer from demanding preassumptions that may be not fulfilled in the real brain, for example, they often still require either symmetric connectivity or two separate processing channels, and often require also special mathematical operations like subtractions or function inversions. Here I propose supervised counterstream learning in deep associative networks as a simpler approach that requires only recognition of errors during training, and then backpropagates correcting target activity through the same activity channel as used for forward propagation. For this, two activity waves are initiated at the same time in input and output layers and then traveling in opposite directions to meet in one of the hidden layers. By employing simple local Hebbian-type learning rules, the corresponding activity pattern sequences get linked bidirectionally, thereby decreasing error rates over time. Despite its simplicity and an incomplete hyperparameter optimzation, a high high test accuracy is achieved on the (binarized) MNIST data set that is comparable to more demanding architectures.

Human adults can often perform a novel task correctly on the first attempt after only receiving verbal or written instructions. This rapid instructed task learning (RITL) is a hallmark of human cognitive flexibility, yet its mechanisms and parallels in artificial systems remain under-explored across disciplines. In this position paper, we argue that humans possess an evolved instruction-following bias -- an inductive bias shaped by evolution to interpret and execute linguistic instructions which critically enables fast generalization of behavior from language. This bias functions analogously to the way large language models (LLMs) leverage instruction tuning to achieve zero-shot task performance. We synthesize evidence from cognitive science, neuroscience, and machine learning research to support this hypothesis. While instruction-following in AI is currently achieved via specialized training protocols, we posit that in humans it arises as an innate cognitive architecture feature. We outline testable predictions and call for more interdisciplinary research to investigate Instruction-Following as a unifying mechanism enabling rapid task learning in both natural and artificial neural networks.

In the context of artificial neural networks, subliminal learning refers to the transfer of task-relevant knowledge or unintended biases from teacher to student models through distillation on task-unrelated input$\unicode{x2013}$output pairs. Prior explanations tie this effect to shared or closely matched teacher$\unicode{x2013}$student initialization. We show that a closely matched initialization is not necessary. Instead, subliminal learning is governed by compatible output heads. Using a controlled MNIST setting, we split outputs into an auxiliary head (for auxiliary, task-unrelated noise signals) and a class head (for classification) to demonstrate subliminal learning occurs$\unicode{x2014}$even when we randomly initialize hidden layers and remove layers, add new layers, or change the architecture (MLP-to-CNN). Compatible auxiliary heads enable transfer of a recoverable teacher signal, bringing the student's representations closer to the teacher's. When the class heads remain compatible as well, students trained only on task-unrelated noise can approach, and in favorable regimes match, teacher-level task performance. Our setting enables us to develop a theory that explains the mechanism of subliminal learning and to derive upper bounds on when subliminal learning fails. Together, our results turn subliminal learning from a surprising transfer effect into a theoretically grounded mechanism with predictable limits.