MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145626058 · doi:10.1109/icar.2005.1507431

Emergence of coherent behaviors from homogenous sensorimotor coupling

2006· article· en· W2145626058 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Bovet, Rolf Pfeifer

Bibliographic record

VenueICAR '05. Proceedings., 12th International Conference on Advanced Robotics, 2005. · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModalitiesComputer scienceRobotPerceptionSet (abstract data type)Object (grammar)Coupling (piping)Task (project management)HomogeneousSensory systemArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionCognitive psychologyPsychologyNeuroscienceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It seems self-evident that an agent's perception of its surrounding environment is tightly coupled to its behavior. However, most robot control architectures make some assumptions about how sensory information relates to motor actions, in order to provide a set of basic behaviors (such as reflexes). It is largely unknown to what extent these biases reduce the potential for the generation of diverse or unexpected behaviors from the agent-environment interaction. In this paper, we propose a new model of robot control architecture, consisting of homogeneous, non-hierarchical coupling, which only learns the correlation of simultaneous activity between any pair of sensor or motor modalities. We show that the propagation of activity across the different modalities, modulated by the learnt correlations, can lead to the emergence of coherent complex behaviors, such as approaching and following an object, or solving a task based on the temporal relationship between an early clue and a delayed reward

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.263
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICAR '05. Proceedings., 12th International Conference on Advanced Robotics, 2005.Same topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207