Page 132 - Biomimetics : Biologically Inspired Technologies
P. 132

Bar-Cohen : Biomimetics: Biologically Inspired Technologies DK3163_c003 Final Proof page 118 21.9.2005 11:41pm




                    118                                     Biomimetics: Biologically Inspired Technologies

                       Since not all symbols of the answer lexicon of Figure 3.A.6 receive knowledge links from all
                    four assumed facts a, b, g, and d, what will be the input excitation sums on symbols that receive
                    fewer than four link inputs (total excitation level of the entire ensemble of neurons representing that
                    symbol in the answer module)? For example, consider an answer lexicon symbol u which only
                    receives links from assumed facts b and d. The total input excitation sum I(u) of the set of neurons
                    which represent u will be:

                                      I(u)   K   [a þ log (p(bju))] þ K   [a þ log (p(dju))]
                                                                         b
                                                     b
                                          ¼ 2K   a þ K   log [p(bju)   p(dju)]                (3A:5)
                                                        b
                    Thus, given that each individual term in the first lines of Equations (3A.4) and (3A.5) lies between
                    K   10 and K   60, the value of I(u) (Equation (3A.5)) could, in extreme cases, be larger than that of
                    I(l) of Equation (3A.4) (although in most cases I(u) will be smaller and u will not be the winning
                    symbol). In any event, the symbol with the highest I value will win the confabulation.
                       Note that in cognitive functions which employ binary knowledge (every knowledge link
                    transponder neuron synapse is either unstrengthened or is ‘‘strong’’), I(l) is roughly proportional
                    to the number of links that symbol l receives. Thus, in these cortical areas, confabulation devolves
                    into simply choosing the symbol with the most knowledge link inputs. Although it is not discussed
                    in this chapter, this is exactly what such cognitive functions demand.
                       The seeming problem identified above of having symbols which are missing one or more
                    knowledge links win the confabulation competition is not actually a problem at all. Sometimes
                    (e.g., in early visual processing) this is exactly what we want, and at other times, when we want to
                    absolutely avoid this possibility, we can simply carry out multiple confabulations in succession
                    to form a sequence of expectations. Also, some portions of cortex probably have smaller dynamic
                    ranges (e.g., 40 to 60 instead of 10 to 60) for strengthened synapses, which also helps solve this
                    potential problem.
                       As discussed in Section 3.1 of the main chapter, in mechanizing cognition we explicitly address
                    this issue by appropriately defining a constant called the bandgap (related to quantity above).
                       In summary, the theory claims that the above-sketched biological implementation of confabu-
                    lation meets all information processing requirements of all aspects of cognition; yet, it is blazingly
                    fast and can be accurately and reliably carried out with relatively simple components (neurons and
                    synapses) which operate independently in parallel. Confabulation is my candidate for the greatest
                    evolutionary discovery of all time (with strong runners-up being DNA and photosynthesis).

                    3.A.6 Action Commands

                    At the end of a confabulation operation, there is often a single symbol active. For example, the
                    triangular red cortical neurons (belonging to Layers II, III, and IV) shown in Figure 3.A.2 represent
                    one particular symbol of the module which is now active following a confabulation. Of course, in
                    a real human thalamocortical module, such an active symbol would be represented by tens to
                    hundreds (depending on the location of the module in cortex) of ‘‘red’’ neurons, not the few shown
                    in the figure.
                       A key principle of the theory is that at the moment a single symbol of a module achieves the
                    active state at the end of a confabulation operation, a specific set of neurons in Layer V of the
                    cortical portion of that module (or of a nearby module — this possibility will be ignored here)
                    become highly excited. The outputs of these cortical Layer V neurons (shown in brown in Figure
                    3.A.2) leave cortex and proceed immediately to subcortical action nuclei (of which there are many,
                    with many different functions). This is the theory’s conclusion–action principle. In effect, every
                    time cognition reaches a definitive single conclusion, a behavior is launched. This is what keeps us
                    moving, thinking, and doing, every moment we are awake.
   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137