Constructivist neural network models of cognitive development

In this thesis I investigate the modelling of cognitive development with constructivist neural networks. I argue that the constructivist nature of development, that is, the building of a cognitive system through active interactions with its environment, is an essential property of human development and should be considered in models of cognitive development. I evaluate this claim on the basis of evidence from cortical development, cognitive development, and learning theory. In an empirical evaluation of this claim, I then present a constructivist neural network model of the acquisition of the English past tense and of impaired inflectional processing in German agrammatic aphasics. The model displays a realistic course of acquisition, closely modelling the U-shaped learning curve and more detailed effects such as frequency and family effects. Further, the model develops double dissociations between regular and irregular verbs. I argue that the ability of the model to account for the hu..

Creativity as Cognitive design \ud The case of mesoscopic variables in Meta-Structures\ud

Creativity is an open problem which has been differently approached by several disciplines since a long time. In this contribution we consider as creative the constructivist design an observer does on the description levels of complex phenomena, such as the self-organized and emergent ones ( e.g., Bènard rollers, Belousov-Zhabotinsky reactions, flocks, swarms, and more radical cognitive and social emergences). We consider this design as related to the Gestaltian creation of a language fit for representing natural processes and the observer in an integrated way. Organised systems, both artificial and most of the natural ones are designed/ modelled according to a logical closed model which masters all the inter-relation between their constitutive elements, and which can be described by an algorithm or a single formal model. We will show there that logical openness and DYSAM (Dynamical Usage of Models) are the proper tools for those phenomena which cannot be described by algorithms or by a single formal model. The strong correlation between emergence and creativity suggests that an open model is the best way to provide a formal definition of creativity. A specific application relates to the possibility to shape the emergence of Collective Behaviours. Different modelling approaches have been introduced, based on symbolic as well as sub-symbolic rules of interaction to simulate collective phenomena by means of computational emergence. Another approach is based on modelling collective phenomena as sequences of Multiple Systems established by percentages of conceptually interchangeable agents taking on the same roles at different times and different roles at the same time. In the Meta-Structures project we propose to use mesoscopic variables as creative design, invention, good continuity and imitation of the description level. In the project we propose to define the coherence of sequences of Multiple Systems by using the values taken on by the dynamic mesoscopic clusters of its constitutive elements, such as the instantaneous number of elements having, in a flock, the same speed, distance from their nearest neighbours, direction and altitude. In Meta-Structures the collective behaviour’s coherence corresponds, for instance, to the scalar values taken by speed, distance, direction and altitude along time, through statistical strategies of interpolation, quasi-periodicity, levels of ergodicity and their reciprocal relationship. In this case the constructivist role of the observer is considered creative as it relates to neither non-linear replication nor transposition of levels of description and models used for artificial systems, like reductionism. Creativity rather lies in inventing new mesoscopic variables able to identify coherent patterns in complex systems. As it is known, mesoscopic variables represent partial macroscopic properties of a system by using some of the microscopic degrees of freedom possessed by composing elements. Such partial usage of microscopic as well as macroscopic properties allows a kind of Gestaltian continuity and imitation between levels of descriptions for mesoscopic modelling. \ud \u

Are developmental disorders like cases of adult brain damage? Implications from connectionist modelling

It is often assumed that similar domain-specific behavioural impairments found in cases of adult brain damage and developmental disorders correspond to similar underlying causes, and can serve as convergent evidence for the modular structure of the normal adult cognitive system. We argue that this correspondence is contingent on an unsupported assumption that atypical development can produce selective deficits while the rest of the system develops normally (Residual Normality), and that this assumption tends to bias data collection in the field. Based on a review of connectionist models of acquired and developmental disorders in the domains of reading and past tense, as well as on new simulations, we explore the computational viability of Residual Normality and the potential role of development in producing behavioural deficits. Simulations demonstrate that damage to a developmental model can produce very different effects depending on whether it occurs prior to or following the training process. Because developmental disorders typically involve damage prior to learning, we conclude that the developmental process is a key component of the explanation of endstate impairments in such disorders. Further simulations demonstrate that in simple connectionist learning systems, the assumption of Residual Normality is undermined by processes of compensation or alteration elsewhere in the system. We outline the precise computational conditions required for Residual Normality to hold in development, and suggest that in many cases it is an unlikely hypothesis. We conclude that in developmental disorders, inferences from behavioural deficits to underlying structure crucially depend on developmental conditions, and that the process of ontogenetic development cannot be ignored in constructing models of developmental disorders

Models of atypical development must also be models of normal development

Functional magnetic resonance imaging studies of developmental disorders and normal cognition that include children are becoming increasingly common and represent part of a newly expanding field of developmental cognitive neuroscience. These studies have illustrated the importance of the process of development in understanding brain mechanisms underlying cognition and including children ill the study of the etiology of developmental disorders

Precis of neuroconstructivism: how the brain constructs cognition

Neuroconstructivism: How the Brain Constructs Cognition proposes a unifying framework for the study of cognitive development that brings together (1) constructivism (which views development as the progressive elaboration of increasingly complex structures), (2) cognitive neuroscience (which aims to understand the neural mechanisms underlying behavior), and (3) computational modeling (which proposes formal and explicit specifications of information processing). The guiding principle of our approach is context dependence, within and (in contrast to Marr [1982]) between levels of organization. We propose that three mechanisms guide the emergence of representations: competition, cooperation, and chronotopy; which themselves allow for two central processes: proactivity and progressive specialization. We suggest that the main outcome of development is partial representations, distributed across distinct functional circuits. This framework is derived by examining development at the level of single neurons, brain systems, and whole organisms. We use the terms encellment, embrainment, and embodiment to describe the higher-level contextual influences that act at each of these levels of organization. To illustrate these mechanisms in operation we provide case studies in early visual perception, infant habituation, phonological development, and object representations in infancy. Three further case studies are concerned with interactions between levels of explanation: social development, atypical development and within that, developmental dyslexia. We conclude that cognitive development arises from a dynamic, contextual change in embodied neural structures leading to partial representations across multiple brain regions and timescales, in response to proactively specified physical and social environment

Modelling the acquisition of syntactic categories

This research represents an attempt to model the child’s acquisition of syntactic categories. A computational model, based on the EPAM theory of perception and learning, is developed. The basic assumptions are that (1) syntactic categories are actively constructed by the child using distributional learning abilities; and (2) cognitive constraints in learning rate and memory capacity limit these learning abilities. We present simulations of the syntax acquisition of a single subject, where the model learns to build up multi-word utterances by scanning a sample of the speech addressed to the subject by his mother

Concept mapping and other formalisms as mindtools for representing knowledge

We seek to provide an alternative theoretical perspective on concept mapping (a formalism for representing structural knowledge) to that provided by Ray McAleese in this issue of ALT-J (auto-monitoring). We begin with an overview of concept maps as a means of describing a learner's knowledge constructs, and then discuss a broader class of tools, Mindtools, of which concept maps are a member. We proceed by defining Mindtools as formalisms for representing knowledge, and further elaborate on concept maps as a formalism for representing a particular kind of knowledge: structural knowledge. We then address McAleese's use of the term auto-monitoring and some of the steps in his model of concept maps. Finally, we describe some limitations of concept mapping as a formalism and as a cognitive learning strategy

Modelling individual variability in cognitive development

Investigating variability in reasoning tasks can provide insights into key issues in the study of cognitive development. These include the mechanisms that underlie developmental transitions, and the distinction between individual differences and developmental disorders. We explored the mechanistic basis of variability in two connectionist models of cognitive development, a model of the Piagetian balance scale task (McClelland, 1989) and a model of the Piagetian conservation task (Shultz, 1998). For the balance scale task, we began with a simple feed-forward connectionist model and training patterns based on McClelland (1989). We investigated computational parameters, problem encodings, and training environments that contributed to variability in development, both across groups and within individuals. We report on the parameters that affect the complexity of reasoning and the nature of ‘rule’ transitions exhibited by networks learning to reason about balance scale problems. For the conservation task, we took the task structure and problem encoding of Shultz (1998) as our base model. We examined the computational parameters, problem encodings, and training environments that contributed to variability in development, in particular examining the parameters that affected the emergence of abstraction. We relate the findings to existing cognitive theories on the causes of individual differences in development

Modelling the Developing Mind: From Structure to Change

This paper presents a theory of cognitive change. The theory assumes that the fundamental causes of cognitive change reside in the architecture of mind. Thus, the architecture of mind as specified by the theory is described first. It is assumed that the mind is a three-level universe involving (1) a processing system that constrains processing potentials, (2) a set of specialized capacity systems that guide understanding of different reality and knowledge domains, and (3) a hypecognitive system that monitors and controls the functioning of all other systems. The paper then specifies the types of change that may occur in cognitive development (changes within the levels of mind, changes in the relations between structures across levels, changes in the efficiency of a structure) and a series of general (e.g., metarepresentation) and more specific mechanisms (e.g., bridging, interweaving, and fusion) that bring the changes about. It is argued that different types of change require different mechanisms. Finally, a general model of the nature of cognitive development is offered. The relations between the theory proposed in the paper and other theories and research in cognitive development and cognitive neuroscience is discussed throughout the paper