1 / 184

Computational models of cognitive control (II)

Computational models of cognitive control (II). Matthew Botvinick Princeton Neuroscience Institute and Department of Psychology, Princeton University. Banishing the homunculus. Banishing the homunculus Decision-making in control:. Banishing the homunculus Decision-making in control:

orde
Download Presentation

Computational models of cognitive control (II)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Computational models of cognitive control (II) Matthew Botvinick Princeton Neuroscience Institute and Department of Psychology, Princeton University

  2. Banishing the homunculus

  3. Banishing the homunculus Decision-making in control:

  4. Banishing the homunculus Decision-making in control: Not only, “How does control shape decision-making?”

  5. Banishing the homunculus Decision-making in control: Not only, “How does control shape decision-making?” But also, “How are ‘control states’ selected?”

  6. Banishing the homunculus Decision-making in control: Not only, “How does control shape decision-making?” But also, “How are ‘control states’ selected?” And, “How are they updated over time?”

  7. 1. Routine sequential action Botvinick & Plaut, Psychological Review, 2004 Botvinick, Proceedings of the Royal Society, B, 2007. Botvinick, TICS, 2008

  8. ‘Routine sequential action’ • Action on familiar objects • Well-defined sequential structure • Concrete goals • Highly routine • Everyday tasks

  9. ?! Computational models of cognitive control (II) Matthew Botvinick Princeton Neuroscience Institute and Department of Psychology, Princeton University

  10. ADD GROUNDS ADD CREAM ADD SUGAR ADD SUGAR FROM SUGARPACK ADD SUGAR FROM SUGARBOWL PICK-UP PUT-DOWN POUR STIR TEAR SCOOP Hierarchical structure MAKE INSTANT COFFEE

  11. MAKE INSTANT COFFEE ADD GROUNDS ADD CREAM ADD SUGAR ADD SUGAR FROM SUGARBOWL / PACKET PICK-UP PUT-DOWN POUR STIR TEAR SCOOP Hierarchical models of action (e.g.,Cooper & Shallice, 2000; Estes, 1972; Houghton, 1990; MacKay, 1987, Rumelhart & Norman, 1982) • Schemas as primitive elements • Hierarchical structure of task built directly into architecture

  12. at at+2 at+1 st st+2 st+1 pt pt+2 pt+1 An alternative approach

  13. at at+2 at+1 st st+2 st+1 pt pt+2 pt+1 • p, s, a = patterns of activation over simple processing units • Weighted, excitatory/inhibitory connections • Weights adjusted through gradient-descent learning in target task domains

  14. Recurrent neural networks • Feedback as well as feedforward connections • Allow preservation of information over time • Demonstrated capacity to learn sequential behaviors (e.g., Cleermans, 1993; Elman, 1990)

  15. environment The model action internal representation perceptual input

  16. Fixate(Blue) Fixate(Green) Fixate(Top) PickUp Fixate(Table) PutDown Fixate(Green) PickUp Ballard, Hayhoe, Pook & Rao, (1996). BBS.

  17. environment Model architecture manipulative perceptual action perceptual input viewed object held object

  18. Routine sequential action: Task domain • Hierarchically structured • Actions/subtasks may appear in multiple contexts • Environmental cues alone sometimes insufficient to guide action selection • Subtasks that may be executed in variable order • Subtask disjunctions

  19. grounds cream cream Start drink End ` steep tea drink End

  20. Manipulative actions sugar-packet Perceptual actions Representations

  21. Input Target/ output

  22. Input Target/ output

  23. Input Target/ output

  24. Input Target/ output

  25. Input Target/ output

  26. Input Target/ output

  27. Input Target/ output

  28. Model behavior

  29. grounds cream cream Start drink End 15% 18% grounds cream cream Start drink End 12% 10% grounds grounds cream cream cream cream Start Start drink drink End End 20% 25% Start Start drink steep tea drink steep tea End End

  30. Slips of action (after Reason) • Occur at decision (or fork) points • Sequence errors involve subtask omissions, repetitions, and lapses • Lapses show effect of relative task frequency

  31. manipulative perceptual action perceptual input viewed object held object environment

  32. Sample of behavior: • pick-up coffee-pack • pull-open coffee-pack • pour coffee-pack into cup • put-down coffee-pack • pick-up spoon • stir cup • put-down spoon • pick-up sugar-pack • tear-open sugar-pack • pour sugar-pack into cup • put-down sugar-pack • pick-up spoon • stir cup • put-down spoon • pick-up cup* • sip cup • sip cup • say-done grounds sugar (pack) cream omitted drink

  33. subtask 1 subtask 2 subtask 3 subtask 4 100 Percentage of trials error-free 0 Step in coffee sequence

  34. Omissions / anticipations Repetitions / perseverations Intrusions / lapses 80 60 Percentage of trials 40 20 0 0.02 0.1 0.2 0.3 Noise level (variance)

  35. 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 Odds of lapse into coffee-making 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 5:1 1:1 1:5 Tea : coffee steep tea sugar cream * grounds cream cream Start drink End steep tea drink End

  36. Action disorganization syndrome (after Schwartz and colleagues) • Fragmentation of sequential structure (independent actions) • Specific error types • Omission effect

  37. environment manipulative perceptual action perceptual input viewed object held object

  38. Sample of behavior: • pick-up coffee-pack • pull-open coffee-pack • put-down coffee-pack* • pick-up coffee-pack • pour coffee-pack into cup • put-down coffee-pack • pick-up spoon • stir cup • put-down spoon • pick-up sugar-pack • tear-open sugar-pack • pour sugar-pack into cup • put-down sugar-pack • pick-up cup* • put-down cup • pull-off sugarbowl lid* • put-down lid • pick-up spoon • scoop sugarbowl with • spoon • put-down spoon* • pick-up cup* • sip cup • sip cup • say-done disrupted subtask subtask fragment sugar repeated subtask fragment cream omitted

  39. 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 Proportion Independents 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Noise (variance) Empirical data: Schwartz, et al. Neuropsychology, 1991

  40. 70 Sequence errors 60 Omission errors 50 40 Errors (per opportunity) 30 20 10 0 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.04 Noise (variance) From: Schwartz, et al. Neuropsychology, 1998.

  41. Internal representations

  42. 1.9 1.4 0.9 0.4 -0.1 -0.6 -1.1 -1.6 -1.2 -0.2 0.8

  43. 1.9 1.4 0.9 0.4 -0.1 -0.6 -1.1 -1.6 -1.2 -0.2 0.8

  44. 1.9 1.4 0.9 0.4 -0.1 -0.6 -1.1 -1.6 -1.2 -0.2 0.8

  45. 1.9 1.4 0.9 0.4 -0.1 -0.6 -1.1 -1.6 -1.2 -0.2 0.8

  46. 1.9 1.4 0.9 0.4 -0.1 -0.6 -1.1 -1.6 -1.2 -0.2 0.8

  47. grounds cream cream drink drink steep tea

  48. grounds cream cream drink drink steep tea

More Related