A Principle for Learning Egocentric-Allocentric Transformation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerous single-unit recording studies have found mammalian hippocampal neurons that fire selectively for the animal's location in space, independent of its orientation. The population of such neurons, commonly known as place cells, is thought to maintain an allocentric, or orientation-independent, internal representation of the animal's location in space, as well as mediating long-term storage of spatial memories. The fact that spatial information from the environment must reach the brain via sensory receptors in an inherently egocentric, or viewpoint-dependent, fashion leads to the question of how the brain learns to transform egocentric sensory representations into allocentric ones for long-term memory storage. Additionally, if these long-term memory representations of space are to be useful in guiding motor behavior, then the reverse transformation, from allocentric to egocentric coordinates, must also be learned. We propose that orientation-invariant representations can be learned by neural circuits that follow two learning principles: minimization of reconstruction error and maximization of representational temporal inertia. Two different neural network models are presented that adhere to these learning principles, the first by direct optimization through gradient descent and the second using a more biologically realistic circuit based on the restricted Boltzmann machine (Hinton, 2002; Smolensky, 1986). Both models lead to orientation-invariant representations, with the latter demonstrating place-cell-like responses when trained on a linear track environment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".