Abstract:Research on neuromorphic computing is driven by the vision that we can emulate brain-like computing capability, learning capability, and energy-efficiency in novel hardware. Unfortunately, this vision has so far been pursued in a half-hearted manner. Most current neuromorphic hardware (NMHW) employs brain-like spiking neurons instead of standard artificial neurons. This is a good first step, which does improve the energy-efficiency of some computations, see \citep{rao2022long} for one of many examples. But current architectures and training methods for networks of spiking neurons in NMHW are largely copied from artificial neural networks. Hence it is not surprising that they inherit many deficiencies of artificial neural networks, rather than attaining brain-like functional capabilities. Of course, the brain is very complex, and we cannot implement all its details in NMHW. Instead, we need to focus on principles that are both easy to implement in NMHW and are likely to support brain-like functionality. The goal of this article is to highlight some of them.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is how to make neuromorphic hardware (NMHW) achieve brain - like functional capabilities. The author points out that although current neuromorphic computing research has used brain - like spiking neurons to improve the energy efficiency of certain computations, the architectures and training methods of these hardwares still largely draw on traditional artificial neural networks (ANNs). This has led to their inheriting many of the shortcomings of artificial neural networks and failing to achieve true brain - like functional capabilities. Specifically, the paper explores the following design principles in order to achieve more powerful and brain - like computing and learning capabilities in neuromorphic hardware: 1. **Cortical microcircuits (CMs) are composed of more than 100 genetically different spiking neurons**: This principle emphasizes that the structure of CMs is fundamentally different from the randomly connected networks commonly used in current neuromorphic hardware. The complex genetic coding structure in CMs enables them to perform specific computational roles and is more robust than single - unit digital circuits. 2. **CMs adopt soft rank - order coding, that is, a time - coding method using very sparse activities**: This coding method is more robust than the time - coding of a single spike, and is insensitive to time jitter and the deletion or addition of a single spike. In addition, soft rank - order coding also performs well in terms of energy efficiency. 3. **CMs use the separation and integration of information between neurons**: This principle emphasizes that information is processed separately in specialized neuron groups and then integrated into a coherent network output. This mechanism is conducive to continuous learning because not every neuron participates in every computational process. 4. **CMs shape computational capabilities through diverse local synaptic plasticity rules**: Different from the single synaptic plasticity rule (such as STDP) or global learning scheme (such as BPTT) commonly used in current neuromorphic hardware, the brain uses a variety of different plasticity rules. These rules are not only applicable to different types of learning, but also many rules do not require a teacher signal and do not depend on postsynaptic firing. By implementing these design principles in neuromorphic hardware, the author hopes to achieve higher energy efficiency and more powerful brain - like computing and learning capabilities in these hardwares, thereby creating devices that can learn autonomously. These devices can detect and understand significant patterns in high - dimensional multi - modal input streams like the brain, without the need to use engineered homogeneous datasets for training.

How can neuromorphic hardware attain brain-like functional capabilities?