Active Sensing of Visual and Tactile Stimuli by Brain-based Devices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe the construction and performance of `brain-based devices¿ (BBDs), physical devices whose behaviour is controlled by simulated nervous systems modelled on vertebrate neuroanatomy and neurophysiology, that carry out perceptual categorization and selective conditioning to visual and textural stimuli. BBDs take input from the environment through on-board sensors including cameras, microphones and artificial whiskers, and take action based on experiential learning. BBDs have a large-scale neural simulation, a phenotype, a body plan, and the means to learn through autonomous exploration. Key neural mechanisms in the present BBDs include synaptic plasticity, reward or value systems, reentrant connectivity, the dynamic synchronization of neuronal activity, and neuronal units with spatiotemporal response properties. With our BBDs, as with animals, it is the interaction of these neural mechanisms with the sensorimotor correlations generated by active sensing and self motion that is responsible for adaptive behaviour. BBDs permit analysis of activity at all levels of the nervous system during behaviour, and as such they provide a rich source of heuristics for generating hypotheses regarding brain function. Moreover, by taking inspiration from systems neuroscience, BBDs provide a novel architecture for the design of neuromorphic systems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".