PreprintCited by 1Neural Networks and ApplicationsAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingStochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques

$μ$PC: Scaling Predictive Coding to 100+ Layer Networks

Open access
Innocenti, Francesco, Achour, El Mehdi, Buckley, Christopher L.·2025·arXiv

Abstract

The biological implausibility of backpropagation (BP) has motivated many alternative, brain-inspired algorithms that attempt to rely only on local information, such as predictive coding (PC) and equilibrium propagation. However, these algorithms have notoriously struggled to train very deep networks, preventing them from competing with BP in large-scale settings. Indeed, scaling PC networks (PCNs) has recently been posed as a challenge for the community (Pinchetti et al., 2024). Here, we show that 100+ layer PCNs can be trained reliably using a Depth-$μ$P parameterisation (Yang et al., 2023; Bordelon et al., 2023) which we call "$μ$PC". By analysing the scaling behaviour of PCNs, we reveal several pathologies that make standard PCNs difficult to train at large depths. We then show that, despite addressing only some of these instabilities, $μ$PC allows stable training of very deep (up to 128-layer) residual networks on simple classification tasks with competitive performance and little tuning compared to current benchmarks. Moreover, $μ$PC enables zero-shot transfer of both weight and activity learning rates across widths and depths. Our results serve as a first step towards scaling PC to more complex architectures and have implications for other local algorithms. Code for $μ$PC is made available as part of a JAX library for PCNs.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2505.13124

Cites

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?

  • Proposed solutions to predictive coding's scaling problem still require automatic differentiation or global signal propagation.

    “Solutions have been proposed to circumvent this problem [Qi et al., 2025, Innocenti et al., 2025, Goemaere et al., 2025], but they still require automatic differentiation or global signal propagation.”

    From Closed-form predictive coding via hierarchical Gaussian filters (2026) · cites this paper as Innocenti et al., 2025

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Innocenti, F., Achour, E. M., & Buckley, C. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Sussex (GB)
  • RWTH Aachen University (DE)
  • VERSES (United States) (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4416975473
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 1481, 442047500)
  • HORIZON EUROPE European Innovation Council (101070940)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Memory and Neural Computing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Stochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
Keywords
predictive coding, depth scaling, brain-inspired learning, ResNet, zero-shot transfer, training stability, backpropagation alternatives

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