bioRxivNeurosciencePreprint
Signed-XOR Error and Sparse Coding in a Dale-Complaint Substrate for Sequence Memorization
Abstract
How much machinery does a network need to memorize and recall discrete sequences when constrained to a biologically plausible substrate? We address this question using 50 short monophonic melodies in 4/4, used only as a controlled sequence-memory benchmark. Each beat is encoded with two clean one-hot populations - a 12-way pitch code and a separate 2-way {onset, sustain} code - and the decoder emits the same 14-dimensional code, so the autoregressive loop closes in a single neural format. The model obeys Dales law: latent units are excitatory or inhibitory, synaptic weights are non-negative, the decoder is implemented as explicit multi-contact bundles, and the encoder is a frozen sparse random projection wired at cortical ([~]10%) density. On this substrate, a local ENGRAMMER signed-XOR read-out rule combined with a sparse k-winner-take-all code stores the training corpus exactly. With a modest latent expansion (L = 512), the model reaches 100% teacher-forced and autoregressive pitch accuracy, recognizes all training melodies, and separates all held-out melodies as novel with zero overlap. Ablations show that the signed error, sparse code, explicit E/I routing, and multi-contact synapses are the main load-bearing ingredients, whereas learning the encoder is strongly detrimental and dense input wiring does not help. Capacity sweeps show that Dales law mainly increases the capacity required for stable autoregressive recall: teacher-forced storage saturates between L = 128 and L = 256, while free-running recall becomes perfect by L = 512. A matched random corpus reaches the same final fidelity and is recalled at least as well at every capacity, indicating that musical structure does not improve recall on this benchmark and that final fidelity is set by capacity rather than by structure. The result is a Dale-compliant, gradient-free sparse associative memory rather than a general sequence learner.
- Citations
- 0
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Optimal sparsity in autoencoder memory models of the hippocampus
Abhishek Shah, René Hen, … Stefano Fusi·bioRxiv·Jan 6, 2025
- Learning distributed representations with complementary components - A generative approximation framework for episodic memory encoding
Hao Liu, Marcelo Mattar, Sebastian Michelmann·bioRxiv·Oct 23, 2026
- Sparse coding at the input stage of the hippocampus enables fast learning
Animesh Sasan, Robert M. Mok·bioRxiv·Oct 5, 2026
- Path vectors: a neural code for sequential memory
Rich Pang, Stefano Recanatesi·bioRxiv·Feb 28, 2022
- Distinct neural representations of content and ordinal structure in auditory sequence memory
Ying Fan, Qiming Han, … Huan Luo·Journal of NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Jun 4, 2021
- Encoding activity predicts distinct recognition signals during working and long-term memory in the human hippocampus
Catherine W. Tallman, John Timothy Wixted, Peter N. Steinmetz·bioRxiv·Oct 26, 2026