user: text: Write a concise one-sentence TLDR summary of the scientific paper content below.

Title: Biologically-Plausible Learning Algorithms Can Scale to Large Datasets

Paper content:
The backpropagation (BP) algorithm is often thought to be biologically implausible in the brain.
One of the main reasons is that BP requires symmetric weight matrices in the feedforward and feedback pathways.
To address this “weight transport problem” (Grossberg, 1987), two biologically-plausible algorithms, proposed by Liao et al. (2016) and Lillicrap et al. (2016), relax BP’s weight symmetry requirements and demonstrate comparable learning capabilities to that of BP on small datasets.
However, a recent study by Bartunov et al. (2018) finds that although feedback alignment (FA) and some variants of target-propagation (TP) perform well on MNIST and CIFAR, they perform significantly worse than BP on ImageNet.
Here, we additionally evaluate the sign-symmetry (SS) algorithm (Liao et al., 2016), which differs from both BP and FA in that the feedback and feedforward weights do not share magnitudes but share signs.
We examined the performance of sign-symmetry and feedback alignment on ImageNet and MS COCO datasets using different network architectures (ResNet-18 and AlexNet for ImageNet; RetinaNet for MS COCO).
Surprisingly, networks trained with sign-symmetry can attain classification performance approaching that of BP-trained networks.
These results complement the study by Bartunov et al. (2018) and establish a new benchmark for future biologically-plausible learning algorithms on more difficult datasets and more complex architectures.
Deep learning models today are highly successful in task performance, learning useful representations, and even matching representations in the brain BID26 BID24 .
However, it remains a contentious issue whether these models reflect how the brain learns.
Core to the problem is the fact that backpropagation, the learning algorithm underlying most of today's deep networks, is difficult to implement in the brain given what we know about the brain's hardware BID2 however, see Hinton 2007) .
One main reason why backpropagation seems implausible in the brain is that it requires sharing of feedforward and feedback weights.
Since synapses are unidirectional in the brain, feedforward and feedback connections are physically distinct.
Requiring them to shared their weights, even as weights are adjusted during learning, seems highly implausible.One approach to addressing this issue is to relax the requirement for weight-symmetry in error backpropagation.
Surprisingly, when the feedback weights share only the sign but not the magnitude of the feedforward weights BID16 or even when the feedback weights are random (but fixed) BID17 , they can still guide useful learning in the network, with performance comparable to and sometimes even better than performance of backpropagation, on datasets such as MNIST and CIFAR.
Here, we refer to these two algorithms, respectively, as "sign-symmetry" and "feedback alignment."
Since weight symmetry in backpropagation is required for accurately propagating the derivative of the loss function through layers, the success of asymmetric feedback algorithms indicates that learning can be supported even by inaccurate estimation of the error derivative.
In feedback alignment, the authors propose that the feedforward weights learn to align with the random feedback weights, thereby allowing feedback to provide approximate yet useful learning signals BID17 .However
, a recent paper by BID0 finds that feedback alignment and a few other biologically-plausible algorithms, including variants of target propagation, do not generalize to larger and more difficult problems such as ImageNet BID4 ) and perform much worse than backpropagation. Nevertheless
, the specific conditions Bartunov et al. tested are somewhat restrictive. They only tested
locally-connected networks (i.e., weight sharing is not allowed among convolution filters at different spatial locations), a choice that is motivated by biological plausibility but in practice limits the size of the network (without weight sharing, each convolutional layer needs much more memory to store its weights), making it unclear whether poor performance was attributable solely to the algorithm, or to the algorithm on those architectures.1 Second, Bartunov
et al. did not test sign-symmetry, which may be more powerful than feedback alignment since signsymmetric feedback weights may carry more information about the feedforward weights than the random feedback weights used in feedback alignment.In this work, we re-examine the performance of sign-symmetry and feedback alignment on ImageNet and MS COCO datasets using standard ConvNet architectures (i.e., ResNet-18, AlexNet, and RetinaNet). We find that sign-symmetry
can in fact train networks on both tasks, achieving similar performance to backpropagation on ImageNet and reasonable performance on MS COCO. In addition, we test the use
of backpropagation exclusively in the last layer while otherwise using feedback alignment, hypothesizing that in the brain, the classifier layer may not be a fully-connected layer and may deliver the error signal through some other unspecified mechanism. Such partial feedback alignment
can achieve better performance (relative to backpropagation) than in BID0 . Taken together, these results extend
previous findings and indicate that existing biologicallyplausible learning algorithms remain viable options both for training artificial neural networks and for modeling how learning can occur in the brain.
Recent work shows that biologically-plausible learning algorithms do not scale to challenging problems such as ImageNet.
We evaluated sign-symmetry and re-evaluated feedback alignment on their effectiveness training ResNet and AlexNet on ImageNet and RetinaNet on MS COCO.
We find that
1) sign-symmetry performed nearly as well as backpropagation on ImageNet,
2) slightly modified feedback alignment performed better than previously reported, and
3) both algorithms had reasonable performance on MS COCO with minimal hyperparameter tuning.
Taken together, these results indicate that biologically-plausible learning algorithms, in particular sign-symmetry, remain promising options for training artificial neural networks and modeling learning in the brain.

assistant: text: Biologically plausible learning algorithms, particularly sign-symmetry, work well on ImageNet