Cognitive Dynamic Systems: A Review of Theory, Applications, and Recent Advances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The field of cognitive dynamic systems (CDSs) is an emerging area of research, whereby engineering learns from neuroscience. Under this framework, engineering systems are configured in a manner that mimics the human brain and improves the utility and performance of traditional systems. In essence, a CDS builds on Fuster’s paradigm of cognition and is fulfilled with the presence of five cognitive processes: the perception-action cycle, memory, attention, intelligence, and language. When augmented with these processes, a system can be classified as a CDS and is afforded the capabilities of processing information and learning from experience through continued interactions with the environment. Tremendous benefit from adopting the CDS framework has been observed in the literature, especially in the fields of cognitive radio and cognitive radar. More recently, the framework has been extended to other areas, such as control theory, risk control, and the Internet of Things; where the potential for drastic performance improvements has been evident in the literature. This comprehensive article presents a thorough background and exposition of the CDS framework and each field where it has been applied. In addition, we provide a comprehensive review of the recent advancements and related works in each domain by summarizing the key facts relating to the methodologies, findings, and limitations of the surveyed papers. Our novel contributions involve being the first source of centralized information on this topic and forming the foundation for future research efforts by presenting suggestions regarding worthwhile avenues for further investigation.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".