Skip to main content

Evolving Modular Architectures for Neural Networks

  • Conference paper
Connectionist Models of Learning, Development and Evolution

Part of the book series: Perspectives in Neural Computing ((PERSPECT.NEURAL))

Abstract

Neural networks that learn the What and Where task perform better if they possess a modular architecture for separately processing the identity and spatial location of objects. In previous simulations the modular architecture either was hardwired or it developed during an individual’s life based on a preference for short connections given a set of hardwired unit locations. We present two sets of simulations in which the network architecture is genetically inherited and it evolves in a population of neural networks in two different conditions: (1) both the architecture and the connection weights evolve; (2) the network architecture is inherited and it evolves but the connection weights are learned during life. The best results are obtained in condition (2). Condition (1) gives unsatisfactory results because (a) adapted sets of weights can suddenly become maladaptive if the architecture changes, (b) evolution fails to properly assign computational resources (hidden units) to the two tasks, (c) genetic linkage between sets of weights for different modules can result in a favourable mutation in one set of weights being accompanied by an unfavourable mutation in another set of weights.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Belew, R K., McInerney, J., & Schraudolph, N. (1991). Evolving networks: using the genetic algorithm with connectionist learning. In C. G. Langton, C. Taylor, J. D. Farmer, & S. Rasmussen (eds), Artificial Life II. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA

    Google Scholar 

  2. Belew, R K. & Mitchell, M. (1996). Adaptive Individuals in Evolving Populations. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA

    Google Scholar 

  3. Calabretta, R., Nolfi, S., Parisi, D. & Wagner, G. P. (2000). Duplication of modules facilitates the evolution of functional specialization. Artificial Life 6:69–84.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cangelosi A., Parisi D. & Nolfi S. (1994). Cell division and migration in a’ genotype’ for neural networks. Network 5:497–515.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Elman, J. L., Bates, E. A, Johnson, M. H., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D. & Plunkett, K. (1996). Rethinking innateness. A connectionist perspective on development. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  6. Floreano, D. & Urzelai, J. (2000). Evolutionary robots with on-line selforganization and behavioral fitness. Neural Networks 13:431–443.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Jacobs, R. A., Jordan, M.I. & Barto, A. G. (1991). Task decomposition through competition in a modular connectionist architecture: The what and where vision tasks. Cognitive Science 15:219–250.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Jacobs, R. A & Jordan, M. I. (1992). Computational consequences of a bias toward short connections. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 4:323–335.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kolen J. F. & Pollack, J. B. (1990). Back-propagation is sensitive to initial conditions. Complex Systems 4:269–280.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Murre, J. M. J. (1992). Learning and categorization in modular neural networks. Harvester, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Plaut D. C. & Hinton, G. E. (1987). Learning sets of filters using backpropagation. Computer Speech and Language 2:35–61.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Reed, R. D. & Marks II, R. J. (1999). Neural Smithing. Supervised Learning in Feedforward Artificial Neural Networks. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rueckl, J. G., Cave, K. R & Kosslyn, S. M. (1989). Why are “what” and “where” processed by separate cortical visual systems? A computational investigation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1:171–186.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ungerleider, L. G. & Mishkin, M. (1982). Two cortical visual systems. In D. J. Ingle, M. A. Goodale & R J. W. Mansfield (Eds.), The Analysis of Visual Behavior. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag London

About this paper

Cite this paper

Di Ferdinando, A., Calabretta, R., Parisi, D. (2001). Evolving Modular Architectures for Neural Networks. In: French, R.M., Sougné, J.P. (eds) Connectionist Models of Learning, Development and Evolution. Perspectives in Neural Computing. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0281-6_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0281-6_25

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-354-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-0281-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics