↓ Skip to main content

Predictive Technologies: Can Smart Tools Augment the Brain's Predictive Abilities?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Predictive Technologies: Can Smart Tools Augment the Brain's Predictive Abilities?
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, April 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2016.00186
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giovanni Pezzulo, Alessandro D'Ausilio, Andrea Gaggioli

Abstract

The ability of "looking into the future"-namely, the capacity of anticipating future states of the environment or of the body-represents a fundamental function of human (and animal) brains. A goalkeeper who tries to guess the ball's direction; a chess player who attempts to anticipate the opponent's next move; or a man-in-love who tries to calculate what are the chances of her saying yes-in all these cases, people are simulating possible future states of the world, in order to maximize the success of their decisions or actions. Research in neuroscience is showing that our ability to predict the behavior of physical or social phenomena is largely dependent on the brain's ability to integrate current and past information to generate (probabilistic) simulations of the future. But could predictive processing be augmented using advanced technologies? In this contribution, we discuss how computational technologies may be used to support, facilitate or enhance the prediction of future events, by considering exemplificative scenarios across different domains, from simpler sensorimotor decisions to more complex cognitive tasks. We also examine the key scientific and technical challenges that must be faced to turn this vision into reality.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 3%
Norway 1 3%
Switzerland 1 3%
Unknown 29 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 31%
Researcher 6 19%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 44%
Engineering 3 9%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 6%
Computer Science 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 3 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 18 June 2021.
All research outputs
#5,118,975
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#3,906
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,905
of 312,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#49
of 162 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
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 312,587 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 162 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.