Abstract
The objects present in our environment evoke multiple conflicting actions at every moment. Thus, a mechanism that resolves this conflict is needed in order to avoid the production of chaotic ineffective behaviours. A plausible candidate for such role is the selective attention, capable of inhibiting the neural representations of the objects irrelevant in the ongoing context and as a consequence the actions they afford. In this paper, we investigated whether a selective attention mechanism emerges spontaneously during the learning of context-dependent behaviour, whereas most neurocomputational models of selective attention and action selection imply the presence of architectural constraints. To this aim, we trained a deep neural network to learn context-dependent visual–action associations. Our main result was the spontaneous emergence of an inhibitory mechanism aimed to solve conflicts between multiple afforded actions by directly suppressing the irrelevant visual stimuli eliciting the incorrect actions for the current context. This suggests that such an inhibitory mechanism emerged as a result of the incorporation of context-independent probabilistic regularities occurring between stimuli and afforded actions.
References
Bundesen C (1990) A theory of visual attention. Psychol Rev 97(4):523–547
Bundesen C, Habekost T, Kyllingsbæk S (2005) A neural theory of visual attention: bridging cognition and neurophysiology. Psychol Rev 112(2):291–328. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.112.2.291
Bundesen C, Habekost T, Kyllingsbæk S (2011) A neural theory of visual attention and short-term memory (NTVA). Neuropsychologia 49(6):1446–1457. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.12.006
Castiello U (1999) Mechanisms of selection for the control of hand action. Trends Cogn Sci 3(7):264–271
Chao LL, Martin A (2000) Representation of manipulable man-made objects in the dorsal stream. NeuroImage 12(4):478–484. doi:10.1006/nimg.2000.0635
Cisek P (2007) Cortical mechanisms of action selection: the affordance competition hypothesis. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 362(1485):1585–1599. doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2054
Cisek P, Kalaska JF (2005) Neural correlates of reaching decisions in dorsal premotor cortex: specification of multiple direction choices and final selection of action. Neuron 45(5):801–814. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2005.01.027
Desimone R, Duncan J (1995) Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annu Rev Neurosci 18:193–222. doi:10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.001205
Grafton ST, Fadiga L, Arbib M, Rizzolatti G (1997) Premotor cortex activation during observation and naming of familiar tools. NeuroImage 6(4):231–236. doi:10.1006/nimg.1997.0293
Hinton GE (2007) Learning multiple layers of representation. Trends Cogn Sci 11(10):428–434. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.09.004
Hinton GE, Salakhutdinov RR (2006) Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks. Science 313(July):504–507
Hommel B (2010) Grounding attention in action control: The intentional control of selection. In: Bruya BJ (ed) Effortless attention: a new perspective in the cognitive science of attention and action. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 121–140
Hommel B, Doeller CF (2005) Selection and consolidation of objects and actions. Psychol Res 69(3):157–166. doi:10.1007/s00426-004-0171-z
Houghton G, Tipper SP (1994) A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention. In: Dagenbach D, Carr TH (eds) Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 53–112
Seth AK, Prescott TJ, Bryson JJ (eds) (2011) Modelling natural action selection. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Simione L, Nolfi S (2014) The role of selective attention and action selection in the development of multiple action capabilities. Connect Sci. doi:10.1080/09540091.2014.942597
Srivastava N, Hinton G, Krizhevsky A, Sutskever I, Salakhutdinov R (2014) Dropout : a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. J Mach Learn Res (JMLR) 15:1929–1958
Tipper SP (1992) Selection for action: the role of inhibitory mechanisms. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 1(3):105–109
Tucker M, Ellis R (1998) On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 24(3):830–846
Van Elk M, van Schie H, Bekkering H (2013) Action semantics: a unifying conceptual framework for the selective use of multimodal and modality-specific object knowledge. Phys Life Rev. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2013.11.005
Zorzi M, Testolin A, Stoianov IP (2013) Modeling language and cognition with deep unsupervised learning: a tutorial overview. Front Psychol 4(August):515. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00515
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Simione, L., Nolfi, S. Selection-for-action emerges in neural networks trained to learn spatial associations between stimuli and actions. Cogn Process 16 (Suppl 1), 393–397 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-015-0679-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-015-0679-8