Although deep learning models have taken on commercial and political relevance, key aspects of their training and operation remain poorly understood. This has sparked interest in science of deep learning projects, many of which require large amounts of time, money, and electricity. But how much of this research really needs to occur at scale? In this paper, we introduce MNIST-1D: a minimalist, procedurally generated, low-memory, and low-compute alternative to classic deep learning benchmarks. Although the dimensionality of MNIST-1D is only 40 and its default training set size only 4000, MNIST-1D can be used to study inductive biases of different deep architectures, find lottery tickets, observe deep double descent, metalearn an activation function, and demonstrate guillotine regularization in self-supervised learning. All these experiments can be conducted on a GPU or often even on a CPU within minutes, allowing for fast prototyping, educational use cases, and cutting-edge research on a low budget.

Even though neural networks enjoy widespread use, they still struggle to learn the basic laws of physics. How might we endow them with better inductive biases? In this paper, we draw inspiration from Hamiltonian mechanics to train models that learn and respect exact conservation laws in an unsupervised manner. We evaluate our models on problems where conservation of energy is important, including the two-body problem and pixel observations of a pendulum. Our model trains faster and generalizes better than a regular neural network. An interesting side effect is that our model is perfectly reversible in time.

While deep reinforcement learning (deep RL) agents are effective at maximizing rewards, it is often unclear what strategies they use to do so. In this paper, we take a step toward explaining deep RL agents through a case study using Atari 2600 environments. In particular, we focus on using saliency maps to understand how an agent learns and executes a policy. We introduce a method for generating useful saliency maps and use it to show 1) what strong agents attend to, 2) whether agents are making decisions for the right or wrong reasons, and 3) how agents evolve during learning. We also test our method on non-expert human subjects and find that it improves their ability to reason about these agents. Overall, our results show that saliency information can provide significant insight into an RL agent’s decisions and learning behavior.