On Cognition as Dynamical Coupling: An Analysis of Behavioral Attractor Dynamics

Abstract

The interaction of brain, body and environment can result in complex behavior with rich dynamics even for relatively simple agents. Such dynamics are, however, often difficult to analyze. In this article we explore the case of a simple simulated robotic agent, equipped with a reactive neurocontroller and an energy level, that the agent has been evolved to re-charge. A dynamical systems analysis, shows that a non-neural internal state (energy level), despite its simplicity, dynamically modulates the behavioral attractors of the agentenvironment system, such that the robot's behavioral repertoire is continually adapted to its current situation and energy level. What emerges is a dynamic, non-deterministic and highly self-organized action selection mechanism, originating from the dynamical coupling of four systems (non-neural internal states, neurocontroller, body and environment) operating at very different time scales.

The Cognitive Body: From Dynamic Modulation to Anticipation

“…This implies that during this modality the agent is subject to regular intervals of blindness. As pointed out elsewhere [22], the agent evolved in the previous experiment is robust enough to cope with massive perturbations, even of this nature, with no significant alteration of its behavior. Under intermittent regime, entering in the recharging area determines a punishment (-0.…”

“…3, as examined in the previous Section 2 (e.g. [22,48,49,34]). This is to say that bodily states can modulate cognitive dynamics (e.g., think of the effects of particular chemical substances injected in your body) and particular behaviors can critically affect our body (e.g.…”

“…In the experiment described in Section 2 we observed two main classes of strategy. The first, briefly described above and extensively reported in previous work [22,23], is highly dynamic and determines, under the modulation of the non-neural internal control parameter, an overt engagement with a specific object of interest, i.e. the rewarding light source (dynamic engagement).…”

“…-the global activity determining the current behavioral engagement between the agent and its environment (namely, a behavioral attractor, similar to [22,33,34]) is described by a few global variables that compress the specific relevant information for the current sensory-motor activity out of the enormous number of degrees of freedom of the system [12]; -the box labeled sensory-motor flow represents the neural activity associated with the sensory-motor flow of the behavioral attractor; -the corresponding non-neural bodily dynamics are summarized by the box labeled non-neural internal dynamics; -embedded within the global current dynamic we recognize a neural sensorymotor emulator 3 (box anticipation), whose evolution over time is dynamically correlated with the actual sensory-motor flow (similar to [33]), although not necessarily identical to it (as in [35]); -the dynamics of the emulator (adapted during the evolutionary history and/or during the agent's ontogenesis) can anticipate, in the dynamic sense illustrated above, the sensory-motor consequences of the engagement with a potentially noxious activity, as they follow a faster time scale.…”

“…In a recent study [22,23], we have shown how even very simple non-neural bodily states can play a crucial role in the modulation of the activity of an artificial nervous system, i.e. on the behavior generated by an artificial neural network (ANN) implementing the neurocontroller of our simulated robotic agent.…”