r/MachineLearning 1d ago

Project Deepity: A C++ library showing Predictive Coding Networks can match Backprop (97.73% on MNIST in 60s) [P]

I've spent the last month building a local C++ machine learning library called Deepity to test alternative credit assignment algorithms; specifically Predictive Coding Networks (PCNs). While PCNs are fascinating for biological plausibility and continual learning, naive implementations are painfully slow.

By implementing recent research (Accelerated PCNs via Direct Kolen-Pollack Feedback Alignment) and utilizing algorithmic caching to bypass redundant forward projections during the inference settling phase, I managed to close the performance gap with backpropagation on my CPU when training on MNIST (50 epochs).

  • PyTorch Backprop (Feedforward): 98.27% test accuracy in ~70s.
  • Deepity DKPPCN: 97.73% test accuracy in 59.5s.

Next up is porting these kernels to CUDA to scale up the architecture and testing its capabilities in continual learning scenarios where standard backprop struggles.

If you are interested in local learning, alternative credit assignment, or HPC for ML, I'd love your feedback!

105 Upvotes

13 comments sorted by

40

u/IntelArtiGen 1d ago

Competing with backprop on ILSVRC (the full version) would be a substantial next step I'd say. Many algorithms managed to compete with backprop on MNIST, but never went much further.

12

u/Important-Home4431 1d ago

Spot on. That’s exactly what I’ll be testing on while moving to CUDA!

10

u/gkbrk 1d ago

Was the PyTorch version trained on a CPU? MNIST reaches these accuracies in 5 seconds usually.

9

u/chcampb 1d ago

It sounded like it's not a clear speed win, it's a different method that avoids shortfalls of backprop.

6

u/Important-Home4431 1d ago

Yep, both were CPU-only. The reason it usually takes 5 seconds is because of offloading to the GPU or running for ~10 epochs. To get a fair hardware benchmark against my C++ engine, I forced both to run for 50.

I actually just tightened the experiment by giving PyTorch Adam as well, which brought the training time down ~12 seconds, meaning PyTorch’s ATen is still outperforming overall, but since PCNs require iterative settling for each input batch, getting a local learning rule this close to PyTorch’s speed is still pretty satisfying imo.

13

u/wizard_of_menlo_park 1d ago

MNIST is too simple of a benchmark .

5

u/RegisteredJustToSay 18h ago

Isn't it amazing how we now consider it trivial enough to even accidentally obtain good scores on, when it was a legitimately tough dataset at one point in time?

4

u/wizard_of_menlo_park 17h ago

Yes, this just shows how much the field has progressed since then.

2

u/Disastrous_Room_927 1d ago edited 1d ago

Keep at it. I’ve been working on a non-backprop approach that exceeded backprop on MNIST and CIFAR (it hit the same reconstruction loss way faster), but the real work began when I tried to build a language model. I feel like somebody is going to crack egg sooner or later.

3

u/exolon1 19h ago

I also like predictive coding, but the Project Site OOZES of LLM-made slop unfortunately. It really distracts from the potentially cool code and ideas.

-2

u/Thelastreddditor 1d ago

"Deepity: A C++ library showing Predictive Coding" - practical and clear. Bookmarking the idea.