Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the ability of minimal reservoir computers (RCs) to store and select multiple chaotic attractors, a crucial requirement for predictive modeling across diverse regimes. The authors tested ten minimal reservoir topologies on all 28 unordered pairs of eight 3D chaotic systems, evaluating both storage and cue-dependent selection performance. They found that minimal RCs can successfully store multiple attractors but struggle with task switching between them, suggesting a limitation in temporal memory.
Minimal reservoir computers can store multiple chaotic attractors, but their Achilles' heel is switching between them based on external cues.
Modern predictive modeling increasingly calls for a single learned dynamical substrate to operate across multiple regimes. From a dynamical-systems viewpoint, this capability decomposes into the storage of multiple attractors and the selection of the appropriate attractor in response to contextual cues. In reservoir computing (RC), multi-attractor learning has largely been pursued using large, randomly wired reservoirs, on the assumption that stochastic connectivity is required to generate sufficiently rich internal dynamics. At the same time, recent work shows that minimal deterministic reservoirs can match random designs for single-system chaotic forecasting. Under which conditions can minimal topologies learn multiple chaotic attractors? In this paper, we find that minimal architectures can successfully store multiple chaotic attractors. However, these same architectures struggle with task switching, in which the system must transition between attractors in response to external cues. We test storage and selection on all 28 unordered system pairs formed from eight three-dimensional chaotic systems. We do not observe a robust dependence of multi-attractor performance on reservoir topology. Over the ten topologies investigated, we find that no single one consistently outperforms the others for either storage or cue-dependent selection. Our results suggest that while minimal substrates possess the representational capacity to model coexisting attractors, they may lack the robust temporal memory required for cued transitions.
