The Complex Systems Approach: Rhetoric or Revolution

Topics in Cognitive Science

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 72-77

  Eliasmith, Chris ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Computation; Dynamic systems theory; Dynamics; Representation

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COGNITION; CONSCIOUSNESS; DECISION MAKING; FRACTAL ANALYSIS; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; METHODOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SPEECH;

ANIMALS; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COGNITION; COGNITIVE SCIENCE; COMMUNICATION; CONSCIOUSNESS; FRACTALS; HUMANS; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; SPEECH;

EID: 84855962622     PISSN: 17568757     EISSN: 17568765     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2011.01169.x     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Abbott, L. F., & Sejnowksi, T.( Eds.). (1999). Neural codes and distributed representations: Foundations of neural computation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Anderson, C. H., & Essen, D. C. V. (1995). Neurobiological computational systems. In IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence (pp. 213-222). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.
3. Bialek, W., & Zee, A. (1990). Coding and computation with neural spike trains. Journal of Statistical Physics, 59, 103-115.
4. Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamiccognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological review, 100(3), 432-459.
5. Dewolf, T. (2010). NOCH: A framework for biologically plausible models of neural motor control, Master's thesis. Waterloo, ON: University of Waterloo.
6. Eliasmith, C. (1996). The third contender: A critical examination of the dynamicist theory of cognition. Philosophical Psychology, 9(4), 441-463.
7. Eliasmith, C. (1998). Commentary: Dynamical models and van Gelder's dynamicism: Two different things. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 616-665.
8. Eliasmith, C. (2001). Attractive and in-discrete: A critique of two putative virtues of the dynamicist theory of mind. Minds and Machines, 11, 417-426.
9. Eliasmith, C. (2005). A unified approach to building and controlling spiking attractor networks. Neural Computation, 17(6), 1276-1314.
10. Eliasmith, C. (2009). How we ought to understand computation in the brain. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 41, 313-320.
11. Eliasmith, C., & Anderson, C. H. (1999). Developing and applying a toolkit from a general neurocomputational framework. Neurocomputing, 26, 1013-1018.
12. Eliasmith, C., & Anderson, C. H. (2003). Neural engineering: Computation, representation and dynamics in neurobiological systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13. Gibson, J. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
14. Hall, G. S. (1893). The American journal of psychology, Volume 6. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.
15. Hopfield, J. J. (1982). Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 79, 2554-2558.
16. Newell, A. (1990). Unified theories of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17. Olshausen, B. A., Anderson, C. H., & Essen, D. C. V. (1993). A neurobiological model of visual attention and invariant pattern recognition based on dynamic routing of information. Journal of Neuroscience, 13(11), 4700-4719.
18. Osadchy, M., LeCun, Y., & Miller, M. (2007). Synergistic face detection and pose estimation with energy-based models. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 8, 1197-1215.
19. Port, R., & van Gelder, T. (1995). Mind as motion: Explorations in the dynamics of cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. Rao, R. P. N., & Ballard, D. H. (1997). Dynamic model of visual recognition predicts neural response properties in the visual cortex. Neural Computation, 9, 721-763.
21. Rasmussen, D., & Eliasmith, C. (2011). A neural model of rule generation in inductive reasoning. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3(1), 140-153.
22. Riesenhuber, M., & Poggio, T. (1999). Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 1019-1025.
23. Singh, R., & Eliasmith, C. (2006). Higher-dimensional neurons explain the tuning and dynamics of working memory cells. Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 3667-3678.
24. Torres-Oviedo, G., Macpherson, J. M., & Ting, L. H. (2006). Muscle synergy organization is robust across a variety of postural perturbations. Journal of Neurophysiology, 96(3), 1530-1546.