Block-local learning with probabilistic latent representations
David Kappel, Khaleelulla Khan Nazeer, Cabrel Teguemne Fokam, Christian Mayr, Anand Subramoney
OpenReview ground truth
TL;DR — We augment DNNs with feedback networks for local training. Forward and feedback networks are trained and operate in parallel with different sets of weights, addressing the problems of weight transport and locking.
Abstract
The ubiquitous backpropagation algorithm requires sequential updates through the network introducing a locking problem. In addition, backpropagation relies on the transpose of forward weight matrices to compute updates, introducing a weight transport problem across the network. Locking and weight transport are problems because they prevent efficient parallelization and horizontal scaling of the training process. We propose a new method to address both these problems and scale up the training of large models. Our method works by dividing a deep neural network into blocks and introduces a feedback network that propagates the information from the targets backwards to provide auxiliary local losses. Forward and backward propagation can operate in parallel and with different sets of weights, addressing the problems of locking and weight transport. Our approach derives from a statistical interpretation of training that treats output activations of network blocks as parameters of probability distributions. The resulting learning framework uses these parameters to evaluate the agreement between forward and backward information. Error backpropagation is then performed locally within each block, leading to "block-local" learning. Several previously proposed alternatives to error backpropagation emerge as special cases of our model. We present results on a variety of tasks and architectures, demonstrating state-of-the-art performance using block-local learning. These results provide a new principled framework for training networks in a distributed setting.
Author context
Most prolific author: 1 submissions (credibility 1.00).
No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).
Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.
Ranking trajectory
Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.
Battle history — 32 comparisons
Ranked above opponent in 57% of matchups.
- ▼ lost to ProFITi: Probabilistic Forecasting of Irre… ×6
- ▼ lost to Transport meets Variational Inference: Con… ×4
- ▲ beat AmortizedPeriod: Attention-based Amortized… ×4
- ▼ lost to Smoothing for exponential family dynamical… ×4
- ▲ beat Forward $\chi^2$ Divergence Based Variatio… ×4
Judge assessments
Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 32)