Rob Mok

@Rob_Mok@mastodon.world
2 Followers
300 Following
245 Posts
Postdoc at Cambridge. Category learning and concept formation in models & brains. Passionate about cognitive & neural network modelling, theory, & brains. Getting [back] into philosophy of science. Leverhulme ECF.
Websitehttps://sites.google.com/site/robmokbrainbob/
Blog on basic science+http://robmok.blogspot.com

What an amazing thread. Great explanations for this:
---
RT @tomaspueyo
India just passed China as the most populous country in the world. Why?

Because of the biggest accident in history

Look at where people live in India. What's that band up north?
https://twitter.com/tomaspueyo/status/1622753371663867905

Tomas Pueyo on Twitter

“India just passed China as the most populous country in the world. Why? Because of the biggest accident in history Look at where people live in India. What's that band up north?”

Twitter

HIPPOCAMPAL HISTORY TOUR

#HippocampusGurus #hippocampusHistory #hippocampusGurus

The well has run dry. I am awaiting further promised reminiscences, and I can promise a very short publication lag.

Perhaps now would be a reasonable time to raise questions brought up by the personal histories published so far.

But, to contribute something historical today - I'm sometimes asked: why did you and O'Keefe write a book about your theory, since that's a pretty unusual choice for scientists, at least back it was back then. Our initial plan was to write a Psychological Review article, which is what one did with theoretical contributions in those days. But I ruled that out by unknowingly insulting the Editor of Psych Review at a sherry party in Elizabeth Warrington's office off Queen Sq. one evening in the early 1970s. I knowingly insulted a pompous speaker, but I didn't know he was the Psych Review Editor. A fact John O'Keefe conveyed to me shortly after we left the party. What started as a 50 page article aimed at Psych Review became a 350 page hand-typed draft that we circulated for comments to about 30 leaders in the field, including philosophers, psychologists and brain researchers. It took nearly 6 years to revise and publish the final version.

Question for cognition and philosophy folks:

How do you understand the difference between Bayesian, connectionist/emergentist, & symbolic (e.g. Fodor/RTM) approaches to cognition regarding whether they are (a) competing frameworks/theories, (b) incommensurable paradigms that cannot be compared, or (c) different perspectives that could be integrated? Or something else?

Any comments welcome 🙂 Would be interested to hear folks' reasons.

@cognition @cogsci @psychology @neuroscience @philosophy

Competing frameworks/theories
11.1%
Incommensurable paradigms that cannot be compared
8.3%
Different perspectives that could be integrated
72.2%
Something else (please comment if you'd like to)
8.3%
Poll ended at .

Fellow faculty, when you were negotiating your first start-up package, did one of your official advisors (e.g., graduate or postdoc mentor) help you in the process?

Please boost to increase my sample size.

Yes
30.5%
No, but I got advice from another faculty member
8.4%
No, I negotiated it all on my own
20%
Not faculty/Show me the results
41.1%
Poll ended at .
An article using data from the Berlin Aging Studies BASE and BASE-II!
---
RT @utafrith
Today’s Older Adults Are Cognitively Fitter Than Older Adults Were 20 Years Ago, but When and How They Decline Is No Different Than in the Past
https://bit.ly/3ZIwi5A
I love this exceptionally clear graph showing both population and individual test scores for 2 cohorts.
https://twitter.com/utafrith/status/1615653722901585920

Really happy to be part of this really cool project where Ken did a huge amount of work on some really interesting ideas @ProfData. Deep nets, cognitive models, behavior and brain data, what's not to love?

6/6

… and more controller-periphery interactions!

5/6

Our controller-peripheral idea shows that the periphery, which supplies the controller with relevant information (but no more than than) and a costly-energy principle (efficiency), shows brain-like modulation of relevant information in accordance to what is required to learn the concepts (task-appropriate information loss in LOC).

4/6

Our controller-peripheral idea shows that the periphery, which supplies the controller with relevant information (but no more than than) and a costly-energy principle (efficiency), shows brain-like modulation of relevant information in accordance to what is required to learn the concepts (task-appropriate information loss in LOC).

4/6

One cool thing I'd like to highlight in this paper in addition to Brad's thread: in cogneuro people talk about top-down effects, e.g., of attention sensory areas, but very little work has been done on how interacting brain regions achieve this.

3/6