Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Four Questions to Be Addressed
Discussion
References
All Topics
Psychology
Cognitive Science

A global framework for a systemic view of brain modeling

Profile image of Frederic AlexandreFrederic Alexandre

2021, Brain Informatics

https://doi.org/10.1186/S40708-021-00126-4
visibility

…

description

22 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

The brain is a complex system, due to the heterogeneity of its structure, the diversity of the functions in which it participates and to its reciprocal relationships with the body and the environment. A systemic description of the brain is presented here, as a contribution to developing a brain theory and as a general framework where specific models in computational neuroscience can be integrated and associated with global information flows and cognitive functions. In an enactive view, this framework integrates the fundamental organization of the brain in sensorimotor loops with the internal and the external worlds, answering four fundamental questions (what, why, where and how). Our survival-oriented definition of behavior gives a prominent role to pavlovian and instrumental conditioning, augmented during phylogeny by the specific contribution of other kinds of learning, related to semantic memory in the posterior cortex, episodic memory in the hippocampus and working memory in the...

Related papers

Foglia and Grush 2010. Neural reuse: A fundamental organizational principle of the brain. BBS
Lucia Foglia

BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2010) 33

An emerging class of theories concerning the functional structure of the brain takes the reuse of neural circuitry for various cognitive purposes to be a central organizational principle. According to these theories, it is quite common for neural circuits established for one purpose to be exapted (exploited, recycled, redeployed) during evolution or normal development, and be put to different uses, often without losing their original functions. Neural reuse theories thus differ from the usual understanding of the role of neural plasticity (which is, after all, a kind of reuse) in brain organization along the following lines: According to neural reuse, circuits can continue to acquire new uses after an initial or original function is established; the acquisition of new uses need not involve unusual circumstances such as injury or loss of established function; and the acquisition of a new use need not involve (much) local change to circuit structure (e.g., it might involve only the establishment of functional connections to new neural partners). Thus, neural reuse theories offer a distinct perspective on several topics of general interest, such as: the evolution and development of the brain, including (for instance) the evolutionary-developmental pathway supporting primate tool use and human language; the degree of modularity in brain organization; the degree of localization of cognitive function; and the cortical parcellation problem and the prospects (and proper methods to employ) for function to structure mapping. The idea also has some practical implications in the areas of rehabilitative medicine and machine interface design.

View PDFchevron_right
Computational approaches to neural reward and development
steven quartz

Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 1999

View PDFchevron_right
Refocusing neuroscience: moving away from mental categories and towards complex behaviours
Ester Desfilis

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2021

Mental terms—such as perception, cognition, action, emotion, as well as attention, memory, decision-making—are epistemically sterile. We support our thesis based on extensive comparative neuroanatomy knowledge of the organization of the vertebrate brain. Evolutionary pressures have moulded the central nervous system to promote survival. Careful characterization of the vertebrate brain shows that its architecture supports an enormous amount of communication and integration of signals, especially in birds and mammals. The general architecture supports a degree of ‘computational flexibility’ that enables animals to cope successfully with complex and ever-changing environments. Here, we suggest that the vertebrate neuroarchitecture does not respect the boundaries of standard mental terms, and propose that neuroscience should aim to unravel the dynamic coupling between large-scale brain circuits and complex, naturalistic behaviours. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Systems neuros...

View PDFchevron_right
Summary of the Theory of the brain function
Sergio Aranda Klein

The theory of the brain function that I have proposed and tried to summarize here, represents the culmination of a long personal search to deduce an organic inference that likely causes the phenomena usually attributed to mind.

View PDFchevron_right
On the role of theory and modeling in neuroscience
Sage Chen

2020

Abstract: In recent years, the field of neuroscience has gone through rapid experimental advances and extensive use of quantitative and computational methods. This accelerating growth has created a need for methodological analysis of the role of theory and the modeling approaches currently used in this field. Toward that end, we start from the general view that the primary role of science is to solve empirical problems, and that it does so by developing theories that can account for phenomena within their domain of application. We propose a commonly-used set of terms - descriptive, mechanistic, and normative - as methodological designations that refer to the kind of problem a theory is intended to solve. Further, we find that models of each kind play distinct roles in defining and bridging the multiple levels of abstraction necessary to account for any neuroscientific phenomenon. We then discuss how models play an important role to connect theory and experiment, and note the importa...

View PDFchevron_right
BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2000) 23, 781–792 Printed in the United States of America Continuing Commentary
Andreas Demetriou

2010

of the original article: How do minds emerge from developing brains? According to “neural constructivism, ” the representational features of cortex are built from the dynamic interaction between neural growth mechanisms and environmentally derived neural activity. Contrary to popular selectionist models that emphasize regressive mechanisms, the neurobiological evidence suggests that this growth is a progressive increase in the representational properties of the cortex. The interaction between the environment and neural growth results in a flexible type of learning: “constructive learning ” minimizes the need for prespecification in accordance with recent neurobiological evidence that the developing cerebral cortex is largely free of domain-specific structure. Instead, the representational properties of the cortex are built by the nature of the problem domain confronting it. This uniquely powerful and general learning strategy undermines the central assumption of classical learnabili...

View PDFchevron_right
Reconciling computational and dynamic models of the brain
Mike Raymond Wood

This short speculative note inquires into the question as to whether AI computational models of the brain (LLMs most prominently) and neuroscience and computational neuroscience could eventually unify into a comprehensive theory of the brain and mind. True integration isn't trivial. The brain isn't just a computer; it's a living, adapting, and dynamic system deeply intertwined with physiology and the environment. One way of reconciling the two would be to employ the methodology developed by David Marr whereby a high level conceptual model (level) articulated by an algorithmic model or models could be mapped down onto a dynamic (although in this context the objective would be to hypothesis how the dynamic model would actually perform the algorithmic layer. I conclude with an enormous number of open issues.

View PDFchevron_right
The Role of Evolutionary Biology and Computational Theories in Cognitive Neuroscience
Leda Cosmides

The cognitive neuroscience of central pmccssca is currently a mystery. The brain u a vast and complex collec- tion offitnctionally integrated circuits. Recognizing that nat- ural selection engineen a fit between saucnur and kction is the key to isolating thew circuits. Neural circuits were designed to solve adaptive problemr If one caa define an adaptive problem doody enough, one can see which circuits have a structural design that ia capable of solving that problan. Evdutiony bidagiur have developed a saia of sophiaticatcd mod& of adaptive probiems. Some d there models analyze coarrtrabta on the evolution of the cognitive procasa that gwcrn social behavior: cooperation, threat, courtship, kindirected asairtance, and so on. The fonns of social behavior are generated by complex computational machinery. To discover the functional architecture of this machinery, cognitive neuroscientists will need the powerful inferential tooh that evolutionary biology provides, indud- ing its welldefi...

View PDFchevron_right
CONSTRUCTING NEURONS A JOURNEY FOR UNRAVELING THE MYSTERIES OF EVOLVING COGNITION
Maheswar Satpathy

irscpublishing.com

Human Brain has been in continual exploration and engaged in the journey of understanding intricately intertwined functioning of Brain and Mind since times immemorial. But, due to the recent emergence of radical perspectives in analyzing the phenomena, remarkable progress has been accomplished in the present century. The proposition of myriad theories and models, fledgling perspectives and complex and sometimes conflictual views have marked the order of the Intellectual dialogism and communion. Theories regarding how the mind (as brain is a recent concept placing its emphasis mostly on physiological bases) functions, acquires information, retains, modifies, and cognizes has remained a perennial concern for all ranging from a lay person to a philosopher. Considering our present limited knowledge and perspectives the attempt to adhere to a particular perspective will be suicidal. Therefore, the expedition for future bailiwicks should be embarked upon with a manifesto reflecting sound impartial ideology (sufficient enough to be not hyper-ideological), and a perspective which rather than adopting a piecemeal approach to the study of human mind will leverage on a methodological holism.

View PDFchevron_right
Dynamic representations and generative models of brain function
Karl Friston

Brain Research Bulletin, 2001

The main point made in this article is that the representational capacity and inherent function of any neuron, neuronal population or cortical area is dynamic and contextsensitive. This adaptive and contextual specialisation is mediated by functional integration or interactions among brain systems with a special emphasis on backwards or top-down connections. The critical notion is that neuronal responses, in any given cortical area, can represent different things at different times. Our argument is developed under the perspective of generative models of functional brain architectures, where higher-level systems provide a prediction of the inputs to lowerlevel regions. Conflict between the two is resolved by changes in the higher-level representations, driven by the resulting error in lower regions, until the mismatch is 'cancelled'. In this model the specialisation of any region is determined both by bottom-up driving inputs and by top-down predictions. Specialisation is therefore not an intrinsic property of any region but depends on both forward and backward connections with other areas. Because these other areas have access to the context in which the inputs are generated they are in a position to modulate the selectivity or specialisation of lower areas. The implications for 'classical' models (e.g., classical receptive fields in electrophysiology, classical specialisation in neuroimaging and connectionism in cognitive models) are severe and suggest these models provide incomplete accounts of real brain architectures. Generative models represent a far more plausible framework for understanding selective neurophysiological responses and how representations are constructed in the brain.

View PDFchevron_right

References (122)

  1. Ahissar M, Hochstein S (1993) Attentional control of early perceptual learning. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90(12):5718-5722
  2. Alexander G, DeLong M, Strick P (1986) Parallel organization of func- tionally segregated circuits linking basal ganglia and cortex. Ann Rev Neurosci 9:357-381
  3. Alexandre F, Carrere M (2016) Modeling neuromodulation as a frame- work to integrate uncertainty in general cognitive architectures. In: Steunebrink B, Wang P, Goertzel B (eds) Artificial general intelligence. Springer, Berlin, pp 324-333
  4. Alexandre, F. (2020). Creativity explained by Computational Cognitive Neuroscience. In F. A. Cardoso, P. Machado, T. Veale and J. M. Cunha (Éds.), Int. Conf. on Computational Creativity (p. 374-377).
  5. Badre D (2008) Cognitive control, hierarchy, and the rostro-caudal organization of the frontal lobes. Trends Cogn Sci 12(5):193-200
  6. Balasubramani PP, Chakravarthy VS, Ravindran B, Moustafa AA (2014) An extended reinforcement learning model of basal ganglia to understand the contributions of serotonin and dopamine in risk-based decision making, reward prediction and punishment learning. Front Comput Neurosci 8:47
  7. Balleine BW, Killcross S (2006) Parallel incentive processing: an inte- grated view of amygdala function. Trends Neurosci 29(5):272-279
  8. Balleine BW, Liljeholm M, Ostlund SB (2009) The integrative function of the basal ganglia in instrumental conditioning. Behav Brain Res 199(1):43-52
  9. Bandler R, Shipley MT (1994) Columnar organization in the midbrain periaqueductal gray: modules for emotional expression? Trends Neuro- sci 17(9):379-389
  10. Belova MA, Paton JJ, Morrison SE, Salzman CD (2007) Expectation modulates neural responses to pleasant and aversive stimuli in primate amygdala. Neuron 55(6):970-984
  11. Bindra D (1978) How adaptive behavior is produced: a perceptual- motivational alternative to response reinforcements. Behav Brain Sci 1(1):41-52
  12. Boraud T, Leblois A, Rougier NP (2018) A natural history of skills. Prog Neurobiol 171:114-124
  13. Bornstein AM, Daw ND (2011) Multiplicity of control in the basal ganglia: computational roles of striatal subregions. Curr Opin Neurobiol 21(3):374-380
  14. Botvinick M, Ritter S, Wang JX, Kurth-Nelson Z, Blundell C, Hassabis D (2019) Reinforcement learning, fast and slow. Trends Cogn Sci 23(5):408-422
  15. Braver TS, Cohen JD (2000) On the control of control: the role of dopamine in regulating prefrontal function and working. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 551-581
  16. Burnod, Y. (1989). An adaptive neural network : the cerebral cortex. Masson.
  17. Cardinal RN, Parkinson JA, Hall J, Everitt BJ (2002) Emotion and motiva- tion: the role of the amygdala, ventral striatum, and prefrontal cortex. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 26(3):321-352
  18. Carrere, M. and Alexandre, F. (2015). A pavlovian model of the amygdala and its influence within the medial temporal lobe. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 9(41).
  19. Cassell MD, Freedman LJ, Shi C (1999) The intrinsic organization of the central extended amygdala. Ann N Y Acad Sci 877(1):217-241
  20. Chakravarthy VS, Joseph D, Bapi R (2010) What do the basal ganglia do? A modeling perspective. Biol Cybern 103(3):237-253
  21. Craig A (2009) How do you feel-now? The anterior insula and human awareness. Nat Rev Neurosci 10:59-70
  22. Craig AD (2003) Interoception: the sense of the physiological condition of the body. Curr Opin Neurobiol 13(4):500-505
  23. Damasio AR, Carvalho GB (2013) The nature of feelings: evolutionary and neurobiological origins. Nat Rev Neurosci 14(2):143-152
  24. Daw ND, Niv Y, Dayan P (2005) Uncertainty-based competition between prefrontal and dorsolateral striatal systems for behavioral control. Nat Neurosci 8(12):1704-1711
  25. Dayan P, Niv Y (2008) Reinforcement learning: the good, the bad and the ugly. Curr Opin Neurobiol 18(2):185-196
  26. Dean P, Redgrave P, Westby GW (1989) Event or emergency? Two response systems in the mammalian superior colliculus. Trends Neuro- sci 12(4):137-147
  27. Dehaene S, Kergsberg M, Changeux JP (1998) A neuronal model of a global workspace in effortful cognitive tasks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:14529-14534
  28. Diana RA, Yonelinas AP, Ranganath C (2007) Imaging recollection and familiarity in the medial temporal lobe: a three-component model. Trends Cogn Sci 11(9):379-386
  29. Dickinson A, Balleine BW (2002) The Role of Learning in the Operation of Motivational Systems. In: Pashler H, Gallistel R (eds) Stevens' hand- book of experimental psychology, learning, motivation and emotion, vol 3, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York, pp 497-533
  30. Domenech P, Koechlin E (2015) Executive control and decision-making in the prefrontal cortex. Curr Opin Behav Sci 1:101-106
  31. Donoso M, Collins AG, Koechlin E (2014) Foundations of human reason- ing in the prefrontal cortex. Science 344(6191):1481-1486
  32. Dorfman HM, Gershman SJ (2019) Controllability governs the balance between Pavlovian and instrumental action selection. Nat Commun 10(1):5826
  33. Drumond, T. F., Viéville, T., and Alexandre, F. (2019). Bio-inspired Analysis of Deep Learning on Not-So-Big Data Using Data-Prototypes. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 12.
  34. Edelman GM, Gally JA, Baars BJ (2011) Biology of consciousness. Front Psychol 2:4
  35. Eliasmith C, Stewart TC, Choo X, Bekolay T, DeWolf T, Tang Y, Tang C, Ras- mussen D (2012) A large-scale model of the functioning brain. Science 338(6111):1202-1205
  36. Fanselow MS, Dong H-W (2015) Are the dorsal and ventral hippocam- pus functionally distinct structures? Neuron 65(1):7-19
  37. Fix J, Rougier NP, Alexandre F (2011) A dynamic neural field approach to the covert and overt deployment of spatial attention. Cogn Comput 3:279-293
  38. Friston K (2012) A free energy principle for biological systems. Entropy 14(11):2100-2121
  39. Fuster J (1989) The prefontal cortex. Anatomy, physiology and neuro- physiology of the frontal lobe. Raven Press, New York
  40. Genud-Gabai R, Klavir O, Paz R (2013) Safety signals in the primate amygdala. J Neurosci 33(46):17986-17994
  41. Graves A, Wayne G, Reynolds M, Harley T, Danihelka I, Grabska- Barwińska A, Colmenarejo SGG, Grefenstette E, Ramalho T, Agapiou J, Badia APP, Hermann KMM, Zwols Y, Ostrovski G, Cain A, King H, Summerfield C, Blunsom P, Kavukcuoglu K, Hassabis D (2016) Hybrid computing using a neural network with dynamic external memory. Nature 538(7626):471-476
  42. Graziano M (2006) The organization of behavioral repertoire in motor cortex. Annu Rev Neurosci 29:105-134
  43. Gros C (2010) Cognition and emotion: perspectives of a closing gap. Cogn Comput 2(2):78-85
  44. Gruber AJ, McDonald RJ (2012) Context, emotion, and the strategic pursuit of goals: interactions among multiple brain systems controlling motivated behaviour. Front Behav Neurosci 6:50
  45. Guillery RW (2005) Anatomical pathways that link perception and action, vol 149. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 235-256
  46. Haber S, Fudge J, McFarland N (2000) Striatonigrostriatal pathways in primates form an ascending spiral from the shell to the dorsolateral striatum. J Neurosci 20(6):2369-2382
  47. Hassabis D, Kumaran D, Summerfield C, Botvinick MM (2017) Neurosci- ence-inspired artificial intelligence. Neuron 95:245-258
  48. Hazy TE, Frank MJ, O'Reilly RC (2006) Banishing the homunculus: mak- ing working memory work. Neuroscience 139(1):105-118
  49. Hélie S, Ell SW, Ashby FG (2015) Learning robust cortico-cortical associa- tions with the basal ganglia: an integrative review. Cortex 64:123-135
  50. Hikosaka O, Nakamura K, Nakahara H (2006) Basal Ganglia orient eyes to reward. J Neurophysiol 95(2):567-584
  51. Holroyd CB, Ribas-Fernandes JJF, Shahnazian D, Silvetti M, Verguts T (2018) Human midcingulate cortex encodes distributed representa- tions of task progress. Proc Natl Acad Sci 115(25):6398-6403
  52. Jensen O, Lisman JE (2005) Hippocampal sequence-encoding driven by a cortical multi-item working memory buffer. Trends Neurosci 28(2):67-72
  53. Joel D, Niv Y, Ruppin E (2002) Actor-critic models of the basal ganglia: new anatomical and computational perspectives. Neural Netw 15(4-6):535-547
  54. Kassab R, Alexandre F (2015) Integration of exteroceptive and intero- ceptive information within the hippocampus: a computational study. Front Syst Neurosci 9:87
  55. Kassab R, Alexandre F (2018) Pattern separation in the hippocam- pus: distinct circuits under different conditions. Brain Struct Funct 223(6):2785-2808
  56. Koechlin E (2014) An evolutionary computational theory of prefrontal executive function in decision-making. Philos Trans Royal Soc London Series B, Biol Sci 369(1655):20130474
  57. Koechlin E, Ody C, Kouneiher F (2003) The architecture of cognitive control in the human prefrontal cortex. Science 302(5648):1181-1185
  58. Kouneiher F, Charron S, Koechlin E (2009) Motivation and cognitive control in the human prefrontal cortex. Nat Neurosci 12(7):939-945
  59. Kringelbach ML (2005) The human orbitofrontal cortex: linking reward to hedonic experience. Nat Rev Neurosci 6(9):691-702
  60. Laborit, H. (1976). Eloge de la fuite. Folio Essais.
  61. Le Pelley ME (2004) The role of associative history in models of associa- tive learning: a selective review and a hybrid model. Q J Exp Psychol 57(3):193-243
  62. LeDoux J (2007) The amygdala. Curr Biol 17(20):R868-R874
  63. Lee C, Rohrer WH, Sparks DL (1988) Population coding of sac- cadic eye movements by neurons in the superior colliculus. Nature 332(6162):357-360
  64. Llinás RR, Paré D (1991) Of dreaming and wakefulness. Neuroscience 44(3):521-535
  65. Mannella F, Gurney K, Baldassarre G (2013) The nucleus accumbens as a nexus between values and goals in goal-directed behavior: a review and a new hypothesis. Front Behav Neurosci 7:135
  66. Manto M, Bower JM, Conforto ABB, Delgado-Garcia JM, da Guarda SNFN, Gerwig M, Habas C, Hagura N, Ivry RB, Mariën P, Molinari M, Naito E, Nowak DA, Oulad Ben Taib N, Pelisson D, Tesche CD, Tilikete C, Timmann D (2012) Consensus paper: roles of the cerebellum in motor control-the diversity of ideas on cerebellar involvement in movement. Cerebellum 11(2):457-487
  67. McClelland JL, McNaughton BL, O'Reilly RC (1995) Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory. Psychol Rev 102(3):419-457
  68. McLean PD (1973) An evolutionary approach to the investigation of psychoneuro endocrine functions. In: Lissák K (ed) Hormones and brain function. Springer, New York, pp 379-389
  69. McHaffie JG, Stanford TR, Stein BE, Coizet V, Redgrave P (2005) Subcorti- cal loops through the basal ganglia. Trends Neurosci 28(8):401-407
  70. Middleton FA, Strick PL (2000) Basal ganglia and cerebellar loops: motor and cognitive circuits. Brain Res Rev 31(2):236-250
  71. Miller K, Ludvig E, Pezzulo G, Shenhav A (2018) Realigning models of habitual and goal-directed decision-making. In: Bornstein A, Morris RW, Shenhav A (eds) Goal-directed decision making. Academic Press, Cambridge
  72. Milner A, Goodale M (1995) The visual brain in action. Oxford University Press, USA
  73. Moustafa AA, Gilbertson MW, Orr SP, Herzallah MM, Servatius RJ, Myers CE (2013) A model of amygdala-hippocampal-prefrontal interaction in fear conditioning and extinction in animals. Brain Cogn 81(1):29-43
  74. Murray EA, Wise SP, Graham KS (2016) The evolution of memory systems: ancestors, anatomy, and adaptations. Oxford University Press, Oxford
  75. Nallapu, B. T., and Alexandre, F. (2019). Interacting roles of lateral and medial Orbitofrontal cortex in decision-making and learning : A system- level computational model. BioRxiv, 867515.
  76. Niv Y (2007) Cost, benefit, tonic, phasic: what do response rates tell us about dopamine and motivation. Ann New York Acad Sci 1104(1):357-376
  77. Norman J (2002) Two visual systems and two theories of perception: An attempt to reconcile the constructivist and ecological approaches. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25:73-144
  78. Nowak LG, Bullier J (1997) The timing of information transfer in the visual system. In: Rockland KS, Kaas JH, Peters A (eds) Extrastriate cortex in primates, vol 12. Cerebral Cortex. New York, Plenum, pp 205-241
  79. O'Regan JK, Noë A (2001) A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness. Behav Brain Sci 24(5):939
  80. O'Reilly RC (2006) Biologically based computational models of high- level cognition. Science 314(5796):91-94
  81. O'Reilly RC (2010) The what and how of prefrontal cortical organization. Trends Neurosci 33(8):355-361
  82. O'Reilly, R. C., Hazy, T. E., Mollick, J., Mackie, P., and Herd, S. (2014). Goal-Driven Cognition in the Brain: A computational framework. arXiv :1404.7591
  83. O'Reilly RC, Herd SA, Pauli WM (2010) Computational models of cogni- tive control. Curr Opin Neurobiol 20(2):257
  84. O'Reilly RC, Rudy JW (2001) Conjunctive representations in learning and memory: principles of cortical and hippocampal function. Psychol Rev 108(2):311-345
  85. Oudeyer P-Y, Kaplan F, Hafner V (2007) Intrinsic motivation systems for autonomous mental development. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 11(2):265-286
  86. Packard MG, Knowlton BJ (2002) Learning and memory functions of the basal ganglia. Annu Rev Neurosci 25(1):563-593
  87. Padoa-Schioppa C, Assad JA (2008) The representation of economic value in the orbitofrontal cortex is invariant for changes of menu. Nat Neurosci 11(1):95-102
  88. Parent, A. and Hazrati, L. N. (1995). Functional anatomy of the basal ganglia. I. The cortico-basal ganglia-thalamo-cortical loop. Brain Res Brain Res Rev, 20(1):91-127.
  89. Parvizi J (2009) Corticocentric myopia: old bias in new cognitive sci- ences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13(8):354-359
  90. Pauli WM, O'Reilly RC (2008) Attentional control of associative learning- a possible role of the central cholinergic system. Brain Res 1202:43-53
  91. Paz R, Paré D (2013) Physiological basis for emotional modulation of memory circuits by the amygdala. Curr Opin Neurobiol 23(3):381-386
  92. Pennartz CM, Ito R, Verschure PFMJ, Battaglia FP, Robbins TW (2011) The hippocampal-striatal axis in learning, prediction and goal-directed behavior. Trends Neurosci 34(10):548-559
  93. Penner MR, Mizumori SJY (2012) Neural systems analysis of decision making during goal-directed navigation. Prog Neurobiol 96(1):96-135
  94. Pessoa L, Adolphs R (2010) Emotion processing and the amygdala: from a 'low road' to 'many roads' of evaluating biological significance. Nat Rev Neurosci 11(11):773-783
  95. Pezzulo G, Castelfranchi C (2009) Thinking as the control of imagina- tion: a conceptual framework for goal-directed systems. Psychol Res 73(4):559-577
  96. Pezzulo G, Van der Meer MAA, Lansink CS, Pennartz CMA (2014) Inter- nally generated sequences in learning and executing goal-directed behavior. Trends Cogn Sci 18(12):647-657
  97. Pezzulo G, Cisek P (2016) Navigating the affordance landscape: feed- back control as a process model of behavior and cognition. Trends Cogn Sci 20(6):414-424
  98. Pfeifer R, Bongard J, Grand S (2007) How the body shapes the way we think: a new view of intelligence. Bradford Books MIT Press, Cambridge
  99. Redgrave P (2007) Basal Ganglia. Scholarpedia 2(6):1825
  100. Redgrave P, Prescott TJ, Gurney K (1999) The basal ganglia: a vertebrate solution to the selection problem? Neuroscience 89(4):1009-1023
  101. Rizzolatti G, Riggio L, Dascola I, Umiltá C (1987) Reorienting attention across the horizontal and vertical meridians: evidence in favor of a premotor theory of attention. Neuropsychologia 25(1A):31-40
  102. Rousselet G, Thorpe S, Fabre-Thorpe M (2004) How parallel is visual processing in the ventral path? Trends Cogn Sci 8(8):363-370
  103. Rushworth MFS, Walton ME, Kennerley SW, Bannerman DM (2004) Action sets and decisions in the medial frontal cortex. Trends Cogn Sci 8(9):410-417
  104. Sakai K (2008) Task set and prefrontal cortex. Annu Rev Neurosci 31(1):219-245
  105. Shenhav A, Botvinick MM, Cohen JD (2013) The expected value of con- trol: an integrative theory of anterior cingulate cortex function. Neuron 79(2):217-240
  106. Sherman S (2007) The thalamus is more than just a relay. Curr Opin Neurobiol 17:417-422
  107. Sommer M, Wurtz R (2004) What the brain stem tells the frontal cortex. I. Oculomotor signals sent from superior colliculus to frontal eye field via mediodorsal thalamus. J Neurophysiol 91(3):1381-1402
  108. Sutton RS (1991) Dyna, an integrated architecture for learning, plan- ning, and reacting. ACM SIGART Bull 2(4):160-163
  109. Stachenfeld KL, Botvinick M, Gershman SJ (2014) Design principles of the hippocampal cognitive map. In: Ghahramani Z, Welling M, Cortes C, Lawrence ND, Weinberger KQ (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems 27. Curran Associates Inc, New York, pp 2528-2536
  110. Stachenfeld KL, Botvinick MM, Gershman SJ (2017) The hippocampus as a predictive map. Nat Neurosci 20(11):1643-1653
  111. Striedter GF (2016) Evolution of the hippocampus in reptiles and birds. J Comp Neurol 524(3):496-517
  112. Swanson LW, Petrovich GD (1998) What is the amygdala? Trends Neuro- sci 21(8):323-331
  113. Taouali W, Goffart L, Alexandre F, Rougier NP (2015) A parsimonious computational model of visual target position encoding in the superior colliculus. Biol Cybern 109:549-559
  114. Tulving E (1972) Episodic and semantic memory. Organization of Memory. Academic Press, Cambridge
  115. Ungerleider L, Mishkin M (1982) Two cortical visual systems. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 549-586
  116. Uylings HBM, Groenewegen HJ, Kolb B (2003) Do rats have a prefrontal cortex? Behav Brain Res 146(1-2):3-17
  117. Vaidya AR, Badre D (2020) Neural systems for memory-based value judgment and decision-making. J Cogn Neurosci 32:1-28
  118. Varela F, Thompson E, Rosch E (1991) The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
  119. Verschure PFMJ, Pennartz CM, Pezzulo G (2014) The why, what, where, when and how of goal-directed choice: neuronal and computational principles. Philos Trans Royal Soc B Biol Sci 369(1655):20130483
  120. Voorn P, Vanderschuren LJ, Groenewegen HJ, Robbins TW, Pennartz CM (2004) Putting a spin on the dorsal-ventral divide of the striatum. Trends Neurosci 27(8):468-474
  121. Wang JX, Kurth-Nelson Z, Kumaran D, Tirumala D, Soyer H, Leibo JZ, Hassabis D, Botvinick M (2018) Prefrontal cortex as a meta-reinforce- ment learning system. Nat Neurosci 21(6):860-868
  122. Yin HH, Ostlund SB, Balleine BW (2008) Reward-guided learning beyond dopamine in the nucleus accumbens: the integrative functions of cortico-basal ganglia networks. Eur J Neurosci 28(8):1437-1448

Related papers

How to build a brain: from function to implementation
Chris Eliasmith

Synthese, 2007

To have a fully integrated understanding of neurobiological systems, we must address two fundamental questions: 1. What do brains do (what is their function)? and 2. How do brains do whatever it is that they do (how is that function implemented)? I begin by arguing that these questions are necessarily inter-related. Thus, addressing one without consideration of an answer to the other, as is often done, is a mistake. I then describe what I take to be the best available approach to addressing both questions. Specifically, to address 2, I adopt the Neural Engineering Framework (NEF) of Eliasmith & Anderson (2003) which identifies implementational principles for neural models. To address 1, I suggest that adopting statistical modeling methods for perception and action will be functionally sufficient for capturing biological behaviour. I show how these two answers will be mutually constraining, since the process of model selection for the statistical method in this approach can be informed by known anatomical and physiological properties of the brain, captured by the NEF. Similarly, the application of the NEF must be informed by functional hypotheses, captured by the statistical modeling approach.

View PDFchevron_right
Grand Unified Theories of the brain need better understanding of behavior: the two-tiered emergence of function
raoul huys

2018

Over the last few decades, neuroscience, and various associated disciples, has expanded enormously in terms of output, tools, methods, concepts and large-scale projects. In spite of these developments, the principles underlying brain function and behavior are of yet only partially understood. We claim that brain functioning requires the elucidation of the rules associated with all possible task realizations, rather than targeting the activity underlying a specific realization. A first step into that direction was taken by approaches focusing on dynamical structures underlying task performances, as exemplified by Coordination Dynamics. Theoretically, this approach is founded on Haken’s Synergetics, which provides a mechanism through which the degrees of freedom associated with high-dimensional systems may be effectively reduced to one or a few functional ones. This dimensionality reduction, however, is only valid in the vicinity of phase transitions, which severely limits the framewo...

View PDFchevron_right
The hierarchically mechanistic mind: an evolutionary systems theory of the human brain, cognition, and behavior
Paul Badcock

Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 2019

The purpose of this review was to integrate leading paradigms in psychology and neuroscience with a theory of the embodied, situated human brain, called the Hierarchically Mechanistic Mind (HMM). The HMM describes the brain as a complex adaptive system that functions to minimize the entropy of our sensory and physical states via action-perception cycles generated by hierarchical neural dynamics. First, we review the extant literature on the hierarchical structure of the brain. Next, we derive the HMM from a broader evolutionary systems theory that explains neural structure and function in terms of dynamic interactions across four nested levels of biological causation (i.e., adaptation, phylogeny, ontogeny, and mechanism). We then describe how the HMM aligns with a global brain theory in neuroscience called the free-energy principle, leveraging this theory to mathematically formulate neural dynamics across hierarchical spatiotemporal scales. We conclude by exploring the implications of the HMM for psychological inquiry.

View PDFchevron_right
Neuronal Bases of Systemic Organization of Behavior
Olga Svarnik

Advances in neurobiology, 2018

Despite the years of studies in the field of systems neuroscience, functions of neural circuits and behavior-related systems are still not entirely clear. The systems description of brain activity has recently been associated with cognitive concepts, e.g. a cognitive map, reconstructed via place-cell activity analysis and the like, and a cognitive schema, modeled in consolidation research. The issue we find of importance is that a cognitive unit reconstructed in neuroscience research is mainly formulated in terms of environment. In other words, the individual experience is considered as a model or reflection of the outside world and usually lacks a biological meaning, such as describing a given part of the world for the individual. In this chapter, we present the idea of a cognitive component that serves as a model of behavioral interaction with environment, rather than a model of the environment itself. This intangible difference entails the need in substantial revision of several ...

View PDFchevron_right
Neuroscience: What We Cannot Model, We Do Not Understand
Gabriel Kreiman

Current Biology, 2011

To understand computations in neuronal circuits, a model of a small patch of cortex has been developed that can describe the firing regime in the visual system remarkably well.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Cognitive Science
  • Computer Science
  • Medicine
  • Brain Informatics

    • Cited by

    Reinforcement Symbolic Learning
    Thierry Viéville

    Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2021

    Complex problem solving involves representing structured knowledge, reasoning and learning, all at once. In this prospective study, we make explicit how a reinforcement learning paradigm can be applied to a symbolic representation of a concrete problem-solving task, modeled here by an ontology. This preliminary paper is only a set of ideas while feasibility verification is still a perspective of this work.

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved