↓ Skip to main content

Unsupervised learning of complex associations in an animal model

Overview of attention for article published in Cognition, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Unsupervised learning of complex associations in an animal model
Published in
Cognition, December 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.12.015
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Supervised learning results from explicit corrective feedback, whereas unsupervised learning results from statistical co-occurrence. In an initial training phase, we gave pigeons an unsupervised learning task to see if mere pairing could establish associations between multiple pairs of visual images. To assess learning, we administered occasional testing trials in which pigeons were shown an object and had to choose between previously paired and unpaired tokens. Learning was evidenced by preferential choice of the previously unpaired token. In a subsequent supervised training phase, learning was facilitated if the object and token had previously been paired. These results document unsupervised learning in pigeons and resemble statistical learning in infants, suggesting an important parallel between human and animal cognition.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Librarian 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 8 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 10%
Computer Science 3 10%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 11 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 January 2018.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Cognition
#2,926
of 3,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#342,778
of 448,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognition
#33
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,275 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 448,935 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.