Seminars

Zohar Ringel of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem presents a renormalisation-group approach to deep learning based on neural-network field theories. The seminar examines scaling laws, the removal of non-learnable field modes, benign overfitting and open questions about feature learning. The confirmed Quantum Matter seminar takes place in the Bob Room at Perimeter Institute on 8 September 2026, from 15:30 to 17:00 Toronto time.

Michelle M. Li examines how computational analyses can preserve the biological context of a proposed treatment, including cell type, disease state, genetic background and patient characteristics. She introduces Medea, an AI system that combines biological software, predictive models and literature retrieval while checking intermediate steps and reconciling evidence. The seminar presents evaluations involving cell-specific target selection, cancer-cell synthetic lethality and immunotherapy response. A separate yeast experiment tests predictions against previously unpublished measurements of gene-pair interactions under DNA-damaging treatments. The research addresses whether an agent can transfer useful evidence between contexts while recognizing when that transfer is unsupported. Reported comparisons cover predictive performance, computational failures and the ability to abstain. This recording retains the original seminar date.

Nick Bostrom and Brian Greene examine how increasingly capable artificial intelligence challenges familiar accounts of human creativity, originality and consciousness. They discuss whether machine creativity differs fundamentally from human creativity and what evidence could bear on the possibility of subjective experience in AI systems. The conversation also considers Bostrom’s concerns about systems that recognise when they are being evaluated and change their behaviour, and the resulting difficulty of assessing alignment. It then turns to a hypothetical future in which automation removes much instrumental work: what would give human lives purpose, and would the elimination of practical problems suffice for a worthwhile life? The discussion includes education, human agency and the distinction between pleasurable simulated experience and engagement with reality.

Maximilian Kasy examines the human choices and ownership structures shaping artificial intelligence. After introducing how AI works, he focuses on who determines its objectives and controls the resources needed to build it: data, computing capacity, expertise and energy. The lecture argues that these decisions, rather than autonomous technological inevitability, influence the distribution of AI’s benefits and harms in an already unequal society. It presents a framework for understanding AI capabilities and considers democratic control of objectives and public oversight as responses to those concerns.

Useful internal representations should explain the patterns of regularities and dependencies among observations. Probabilistic graphical models promise a principled way to uncover latent factors as such, but they are hard to scale to handle high-dimensional sensory observations and complicated dependencies structures. Neural-networks, on the other hand, excel at approximating complicated high-dimensional functions, but their internal representations do not easily lend themselves to a probabilistic interpretation. Despite some successes, a general unified approach is still missing for integrating the two approaches. I will describe a novel approach towards merging adaptive neural-network components into a probabilistic framework, based on three core ideas. The first is to train a set of networks to collectively perform inference, leveraging the ability of pattern-recognition methods to amortise complicated transformations. The second is to constrain the way in which the outputs of these networks are interpreted, transformed, and combined together. These constraints, together with the learning objective itself, are derived directly from probabilistic considerations encoded in a graphical model. Finally, the third core idea is that of recognition-parametrisation, allowing the inference ("recognition") procedure to directly define the model itself, without requiring an explicit "generative" decoder. Presented in the van Vreeswijk Theoretical Neuroscience Seminar series (formerly WWTNS) on 2026-03-04. Recording duration: 00:48:26.

Although stress can be considered as an ongoing process that helps an organism to cope with present and future challenges, when it is too intense or uncontrollable, it can lead to adverse consequences for physical and mental health. Social stress specifically, is a highly prevalent traumatic experience, present in multiple contexts, such as war, bullying and interpersonal violence, and it has been linked with increased risk for major depression and anxiety disorders. Nevertheless, not all individuals exposed to strong stressful events develop psychopathology, with the mechanisms of resilience and vulnerability being still under investigation. During this talk, I will identify key gaps in our knowledge about stress vulnerability and I will present our recent data from our contextual fear learning protocol based on social defeat stress in mice.

Current machine learning systems consume vastly more energy than biological brains. Neuromorphic systems aim to overcome this difference by mimicking the brain’s information coding via discrete voltage spikes. However, it remains unclear how both artificial and natural networks of spiking neurons can learn energy-efficient information processing strategies. Here we propose Predictive Coding Light (PCL), a recurrent hierarchical spiking neural network for unsupervised representation learning. In contrast to previous predictive coding approaches, PCL does not transmit prediction errors to higher processing stages. Instead, it suppresses the most predictable spikes and transmits a compressed representation of the input. Using only biologically plausible spike-timing based learning rules, PCL reproduces a wealth of findings on information processing in visual cortex and permits strong performance in downstream classification tasks. Overall, PCL offers a new approach to predictive coding and its implementation in natural and artificial spiking neural networks

Traditionally, touch is associated with exteroception and is rarely considered a relevant sensory cue for controlling movements in space, unlike vision. We developed a technique to isolate and measure tactile involvement in controlling sliding finger movements over a surface. Young adults traced a 2D shape with their index finger under direct or mirror-reversed visual feedback to create a conflict between visual and somatosensory inputs. In this context, increased reliance on somatosensory input compromises movement accuracy. Based on the hypothesis that tactile cues contribute to guiding hand movements when in contact with a surface, we predicted poorer performance when the participants traced with their bare finger compared to when their tactile sensation was dampened by a smooth, rigid finger splint. The results supported this prediction. EEG source analyses revealed smaller current in the source-localized somatosensory cortex during sensory conflict when the finger directly touched the surface. This finding supports the hypothesis that, in response to mirror-reversed visual feedback, the central nervous system selectively gated task-irrelevant somatosensory inputs, thereby mitigating, though not entirely resolving, the visuo-somatosensory conflict. Together, our results emphasize touch’s involvement in movement control over a surface, challenging the notion that vision predominantly governs goal-directed hand or finger movements.

The Nature versus Nurture debate has generally been considered from the lens of genome versus experience dichotomy and has dominated our thinking about behavioral individuality and personality traits. In contrast, the role of nonheritable noise during brain development in behavioral variation is understudied. Using the Drosophila melanogaster visual system, I will discuss our efforts to dissect how individuality in circuit wiring emerges during development, and how that helps generate individual behavioral variation.

Accurate perception of the environment is a constructive process that requires integration of external bottom-up sensory signals with internally-generated top-down information reflecting past experiences and current aims. Decades of work have elucidated how sensory neocortex processes physical stimulus features. In contrast, examining how memory-related-top-down information is encoded and integrated with bottom-up signals has long been challenging. Here, I will discuss our recent work pinpointing the outermost layer 1 of neocortex as a central hotspot for processing of experience-dependent top-down information threat during perception, one of the most fundamentally important forms of sensation.

Behavioral time scale synaptic plasticity underlies CA1 place fields

The focus of this talk is not about my research in AI or Robotics but my own journey on trying to do research and understand intelligence in a rapidly evolving research landscape. I will trace my path from conducting early-stage research during graduate school, to working on practical solutions within a startup environment, and finally to my current role where I participate in more structured research at a major tech company. Through these varied experiences, I will provide different perspectives on research and talk about how my core beliefs on intelligence have changed and sometimes even been compromised. There are no lessons to be learned from my stories, but hopefully they will be entertaining.