Cited by 12Neural Networks and ApplicationsNeural dynamics and brain functionEmbodied and Extended Cognition

A predictive-coding network that is both discriminative and generative

Sun, Wei, Orchard, Jeff·2020·Neural Computation

Abstract

Predictive coding (PC) networks are a biologically interesting class of neural networks. Their layered hierarchy mimics the reciprocal connectivity pattern observed in the mammalian cortex, and they can be trained using local learning rules that approximate backpropagation (Bogacz, 2017 ). However, despite having feedback connections that enable information to flow down the network hierarchy, discriminative PC networks are not typically generative. Clamping the output class and running the network to equilibrium yields an input sample that usually does not resemble the training input. This letter studies this phenomenon and proposes a simple solution that promotes the generation of input samples that resemble the training inputs. Simple decay, a technique already in wide use in neural networks, pushes the PC network toward a unique minimum two-norm solution, and that unique solution provably (for linear networks) matches the training inputs. The method also vastly improves the samples generated for nonlinear networks, as we demonstrate on MNIST.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/neco_a_01311

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Predictive coding networks have recently been rediscovered as candidates for solving machine learning tasks and as a potential alternative to backpropagation.

    “Furthermore, predictive coding networks have recently been rediscovered as potent candidates for solving machine learning tasks (e.g., the classification or generation of static images, Sun & Orchard, 2020; Song et al., 2020) and even a potential alternative to the backpropagation algorithm (Song et al., 2024; Millidge et al., 2022b; Whittington & Bogacz, 2017).”

    From The generalized Hierarchical Gaussian Filter (2026) · cites this paper as Sun & Orchard, 2020

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 25 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sun, W., & Orchard, J.
Affiliations
University of Waterloo (CA)
Corresponding author
  • Sun, Wei
  • Orchard, Jeff
Venue
Neural Computation
Published
2020-10
Volume
32
Issue
10
Pages
1836-1862
ISSN
  • 0899-7667 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-888X
OpenAlex
W3049639017
Cited by
11
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neural Computation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
Keywords
predictive coding, feedback connections, local learning rules, sample generation, input reconstruction, linear networks, nonlinear networks, MNIST
MeSH terms
Discrimination Learning, Forecasting, Humans, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Neural Networks, Computer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review