A Model of Early Motivational States and Their Uses
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A model of early development of motivational states is proposed. The states are modeled in terms of modern concepts of state space and are physically realized by long-term-potentiation (LTP)-based neural circuits. The basic idea is to assume existence of libido and aggression instincts that would receive single sensory stimulus and induce capabilities for fight-or-flight, freeze or run, etc. The libido state may lead to happiness, contentment, or activities such as dance or play, imitation of observed behavior and action of others, and engagement in learning by trial and error.Enhancement of two motor skills are presented: responding more quickly in time and delivering a larger force of contact. This is a simple example of how the perception system, the motor system and the motivation system interact. A one-degree-of-freedom second-order mechanical system is modified by a first-order neural facilitator or compensator.The tit-for-tat phenomenon in force escalation is also modeled. The model includes tactile sensors for the measurement of a known force applied to a human finger, afferent transmission of the sensed force to the brain, storage of the perceived force, recovery of the stored force from memory, and efferent transmission of the force to the finger. The situation may change based on perception of more adversaries discouraging retaliation and encouraging resort to withdrawal and / or retreat.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it