Objective: formalize the elementary computation unit and its decision boundary.
A neuron first computes an affine combination, then an activation:
z = wᵀx + b
a = φ(z)The weights w and the bias b are learned. The activation φ is chosen by
the designer. The bias translates the boundary; without it, every linear
boundary would pass through the origin.
The binary perceptron outputs 1 if wᵀx + b > 0, else 0. It can learn a
linear separation, but not XOR. This limitation is not fixed by adding more
examples: the function space of the model is insufficient.
| XOR input | Output |
|---|---|
| 0, 0 | 0 |
| 0, 1 | 1 |
| 1, 0 | 1 |
| 1, 1 | 0 |
No straight line separates the two classes. A non-linear hidden layer can build intermediate representations that then make the separation possible.
The artificial neuron looks like a weighted grid: it adds up features with coefficients, adds a movable threshold, then transmits a signal. The biological analogy should not be taken literally.
What is the role of the bias? Why does a simple perceptron fail on XOR? Are the weights set by hand?
The bias shifts the boundary. XOR is not linearly separable. The weights are learned.
With w=(2,-1) and b=-0.5, compute z then the class of the four points
(0,0), (0,1), (1,0), (1,1). Then try to label XOR with a single
straight line and geometrically explain the failure. Success: distinguishing a
perceptron limitation from an optimization error.
Reading: the weights orient the boundary, the bias shifts it and the activation enables a non-linear transformation. A single neuron only solves simple separations; it is the composition of neurons and the optimization of parameters that give the network its capacity. The trap is interpreting a single weight without accounting for the scale of the inputs and the downstream layers.