Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge / 2006 / iii / Paper 84 / 1 / a

A binary Hopfield network has $N$ recurrently connected units $s_i\in \{-1,+1\}$, symmetric weights $w_{ij}=w_{ji}$, zero self-weights, and thresholds ${\theta }_i$. A distributed memory is a desired population pattern ${\xi }^{\mu }$. One Hebbian learning prescription isCoactive signs strengthen a connection, and opposite signs weaken it. This is Hebbian memory weights for a Hopfield network, rather than a separate address for each memory.

Initialize the units with the input cue, which can be a corrupted or partially specified pattern. Update one unit at a time by $s_i\leftarrow \mathrm{sign}({\sum }_j{w}_{ij}{s}_j-{\theta }_i)$, retaining its old sign when the field is exactly zero. A fair asynchronous schedule revisits every unit. The energychanges on a single update by $\Delta E=-(s_i^{\prime }-s_i)({\sum }_j{w}_{ij}{s}_j-{\theta }_i)\le 0$. An actual flip with the tie convention strictly reduces energy; finitely many states imply eventual arrival at a fixed point. This proves asynchronous Hopfield energy descent. Synchronous updating lacks this single-unit argument and can cycle.

For one stored pattern and zero thresholds, the field at $s=\xi$ is $(N-1){\xi }_i/N$, so the pattern is a fixed point. With multiple patterns, the desired signal is accompanied by cross-talk from other memories; not every arbitrary set is guaranteed to be stable. Retrieval is attraction from a cue to a stored-pattern fixed point, provided the cue lies in its basin of attraction. Spurious minima and limited basins are part of the model, not errors in its update algorithm.