C. E. HENDRIX

_Space-General Corporation_

_El Monte, California_

There are two very compelling reasons why mathematical and physical

models of the neuron should be built. Model building, while widely

used in the physical sciences, has been largely neglected in biology.

However, there can be little doubt that building neuron models

will increase our understanding of the function of real neurons,

if experience in the physical sciences is any guide. Secondly,

neuron models are extremely interesting in their own right as new

technological devices. Hence, the interest in, and the reason for

symposia on self-organizing systems.

We should turn our attention to the properties of real neurons, and

see which of them are the most important ones for us to imitate.

Obviously, we cannot hope to imitate _all_ the properties of a living

neuron, since that would require a complete simulation of a living,

metabolizing cell, and a highly specialized one at that; but we

can select those functional properties which we feel are the most

important, and then try to simulate those.

The most dramatic aspect of neuron function is, of course, the axon

discharge. It is this which gives the neuron its “all-or-nothing”

character, and it is this which provides it with a means for

propagating its output pulses over a distance. Hodgkin and Huxley (1)

have developed a very complete description of this action. Their model

is certainly without peer in describing the nature of the real neuron.

On the technological side, Cranes’ “neuristors” (2) represent a class

of devices which imitate the axonal discharge in a gross sort of way,

without all the subtle nuances of the Hodgkin-Huxley model. Crane has

shown that neuristors can be combined to yield the various Boolean

functions needed in a computer.

However, interesting as such models of the axon are, there is some

question as to their importance in the development of self-organizing

systems. The pulse generation, “all-or-nothing” part of the axon

behavior could just as well be simulated by a “one-shot” trigger

circuit. The transmission characteristic of the axon is, after all,

only Nature’s way of sending a signal from here to there. It is

an admirable solution to the problem, when one considers that it

evolved, and still works, in a bath of salt water. There seems little

point, however, in a hardware designer limiting himself in this way,

especially if he has an adequate supply of insulated copper wire.

If the transmission characteristic of the axon is deleted, the

properties of the neuron which seem to be the most important in the

synthesis of self-organizing systems are:

a. The neuron responds to a stimulus with an electrical

pulse of standard size and shape. If the stimulus

continues, the pulses occur at regular intervals

with the rate of occurrence dependent on the

intensity of stimulation.

b. There is a threshold of stimulation. If the

intensity of the stimulus is below this threshold,

the neuron does not fire.

c. The neuron is capable of temporal and spatial

integration. Many subthreshold stimuli arriving at

the neuron from different sources, or at slightly

different times, can add up to a sufficient level to

fire the neuron.

d. Some inputs are excitatory, some are inhibitory.

e. There is a refractory period. Once fired, there is

a subsequent period during which the neuron cannot

be fired again, no matter how large the stimulus.

This places an upper limit on the pulse rate of any

particular neuron.

f. The neuron can learn. This property is conjectural

in living neurons, since it appears that at

the present time learning has not been clearly

demonstrated in isolated living neurons.

However, the learning property is basic to all

self-organizing models.

Neuron models with the above characteristics have been built, although

none seem to have incorporated _all_ of them in a single model. Harman

(3) at Bell Labs has built neuron models which have the characteristics

(a) through (e), with which he has built extremely interesting devices

which simulate portions of the peripheral neuron system.

Various attempts at learning elements have been made, perhaps best

exemplified by those of Widrow (4). These devices are capable of

“learning,” but are static, and lack all the temporal characteristics

listed in (a) through (e). Such devices can be used to deal with

temporal patterns only by a mapping technique, in which a temporal

pattern is converted to a spatial one.

Having listed which seem to be the important properties of a neuron, it

is possible to synthesize a simple model which has all of them.

A number of input stimuli are fed to the neuron through a resistive

summing network which establishes the threshold and accomplishes

spatial integration. The voltage at the summing junction triggers a

“one-shot” circuit, which, by its very nature, accomplishes pulse

generation and exhibits temporal integration and a refractory period.

The polarity of an individual input determines whether it shall be

excitatory or inhibitory. This much of the circuitry is very similar to

Harmon’s model.

Learning is postulated to take place in the following way: when the

neuron fires, an outside influence (the environment, or a “trainer”)

determines whether or not the result of firing was desirable or not.

If it was desirable, the threshold of the neuron is lowered, making

it easier to fire the next time. If the result was not desirable, the

threshold is raised, making it more difficult for the neuron to fire

the next time.

In a self-organizing system, many model neurons would be

interconnected. A “punish-reward” (P-R) signal would be connected to

all neurons in common. However, means would be provided for only those

which have recently fired to be susceptible to the effects of the P-R

signal. Therefore, only those which had taken part in a recent response

are modified. This idea is due to Stewart (5), who applies it to his

electrochemical devices instead of to an electronic device.

The mechanization of the circuitry is rather straight-forward. A

portion of the output of the pulse generator is routed through a

“pulse-stretcher” or short-term memory which temporarily records the

fact that the neuron has recently fired. The pulse-stretcher output

controls a gate, which either accepts or rejects the P-R signal. The

P-R signal can take on only three values, a positive level, zero, or

a negative level, depending on whether the signal is “punish,” “no

action,” or “reward.” Finally, the gate output controls a variable

resistor, which is part of the resistive summing network. Figure 1 is a

block diagram of the complete model.

Note that this device differs from the usual “Perceptron” configuration

in that the threshold resistor is the only variable element, instead

of having each input resistor a variable weighting element. This

simplification could lead to a situation where, to prepare a specified

task, more single-variable neurons would be required than would

multivariable ones. This possible disadvantage is partially, at least,

offset by the very simple control algorithm which is contained in the

design of the model, and is not the matter of great concern which it

seems to be for most multivariable models.

[Illustration: Figure 1—Block diagram of neuron model]

Hand simulations of the action of this type of model suggest that a

certain amount of randomness would be desirable. It appears that a

self-organizing system built of these elements, and of sufficient

complexity to be interesting, would have a fair number of recirculating

loops, so that spontaneous activity would be maintained in the absence

of input stimulus. If this is the case, then randomness could easily

be introduced by adding a small amount of noise from a random noise

generator to the signal on the P-R bus. Thus, any neurons which

spontaneously fire would be continually having their thresholds

modified.

The mechanization of the model is not particularly complex, and can

be estimated as follows: The one-shot pulse generator would require

two transistors, the pulse stretcher one more. The bi-directional gate

would require a transistor and at least two diodes.

Several candidates for the electrically-controllable variable

resistor are available (6). Particularly good candidates appear to

be the “Memistor” or plating cell developed by Widrow (7), the solid

state version of it by Vendelin (8), and the “solion” (9). All are

electrochemical devices in which the resistance between two terminals

is controlled by the net charge flow through a third terminal. All are

adaptable to this particular circuit.

Of the three, however, the solion appears at first glance to have the

most promise in that its resistance is of the order of a few thousand

ohms (rather than the few ohms of the plating cells) which is more

compatible with ordinary solid-state circuitry. Solions have the

disadvantage that they can stand only very low voltages (less than 1

volt) and in their present form require extra bias potentials. If these

difficulties can be overcome, they offer considerable promise.

In summary, it appears that a rather simple neuron model can be built

which can mimic most of the important functions of real neurons. A

system built of these could be punished or rewarded by an observer,

so that it could be trained to give specified responses to specified

stimuli. In some cases, the observer could be simply the environment,

so that the system would learn directly from experience, and would be

therefore a self-organizing system.

Self-Organizing Systems, 1963 · 第 87 / 92 题