↓ Skip to main content

A biologically plausible embodied model of action discovery

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurorobotics, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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.
Title
A biologically plausible embodied model of action discovery
Published in
Frontiers in Neurorobotics, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnbot.2013.00004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rufino Bolado-Gomez, Kevin Gurney

Abstract

During development, animals can spontaneously discover action-outcome pairings enabling subsequent achievement of their goals. We present a biologically plausible embodied model addressing key aspects of this process. The biomimetic model core comprises the basal ganglia and its loops through cortex and thalamus. We incorporate reinforcement learning (RL) with phasic dopamine supplying a sensory prediction error, signalling "surprising" outcomes. Phasic dopamine is used in a cortico-striatal learning rule which is consistent with recent data. We also hypothesized that objects associated with surprising outcomes acquire "novelty salience" contingent on the predicability of the outcome. To test this idea we used a simple model of prediction governing the dynamics of novelty salience and phasic dopamine. The task of the virtual robotic agent mimicked an in vivo counterpart (Gancarz et al., 2011) and involved interaction with a target object which caused a light flash, or a control object which did not. Learning took place according to two schedules. In one, the phasic outcome was delivered after interaction with the target in an unpredictable way which emulated the in vivo protocol. Without novelty salience, the model was unable to account for the experimental data. In the other schedule, the phasic outcome was reliably delivered and the agent showed a rapid increase in the number of interactions with the target which then decreased over subsequent sessions. We argue this is precisely the kind of change in behavior required to repeatedly present representations of context, action and outcome, to neural networks responsible for learning action-outcome contingency. The model also showed cortico-striatal plasticity consistent with learning a new action in basal ganglia. We conclude that action learning is underpinned by a complex interplay of plasticity and stimulus salience, and that our model contains many of the elements for biological action discovery to take place.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
France 1 2%
Chile 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 42 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 25%
Researcher 11 23%
Student > Master 7 15%
Other 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 4 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 10 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 19%
Neuroscience 8 17%
Psychology 7 15%
Engineering 3 6%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 5 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 December 2013.
All research outputs
#14,747,687
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#394
of 845 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,253
of 280,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#14
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 845 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 280,698 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.