MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000908437 · doi:10.1162/neco.2007.10-06-361

A Principle for Learning Egocentric-Allocentric Transformation

2007· letter· en· W2000908437 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Computation · 2007
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceOrientation (vector space)Computer scienceSensory systemBoltzmann machineInvariant (physics)PopulationRestricted Boltzmann machinePsychologyArtificial neural networkComputer visionNeurosciencePattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it