How does environmental structure influence the dynamics of adaptive behavior and its underlying mechanisms? By analyzing the neural controller of a simulated head/eye system, we show that a specific measure—“neural complexity”—can be selectively sensitive to neural dynamics underlying rich adaptive behavior. Evolutionary algorithms were used to generate neural network controllers able to support target fixation in environmental and phenotypic conditions of qualitatively different complexity. Networks that evolved in rich conditions showed higher behavioral flexibility and robustness, and higher neural complexity, than networks that evolved in simple conditions. The magnitude of neural complexity, which reflects a balance between dynamical integration and dynamical segregation, depended on properties of both the environment and the head/eye phenotype. These results show that neurally complex dynamics can accompany adaptive behavior in rich environmental and phenotypic conditions; they are consistent with the proposal that neural complexity may represent a common property of the functional organization of adaptive neural systems.
Abraham, R. , & Shaw, C. (1981). Dynamics, the geometry of behavior, parts 1–4. Santa Cruz, CA: Aerial Press .
2.
Albert, R. , & Barábasi, A. (2002). Statistical mechanics of complex networks . Reviews of Modern Physics, 74, 47–97 .
3.
Beer, R. (2004). The dynamics of active categorical perception in an evolved model agent. Adaptive Behavior (in press).
4.
Beer, R. , Chiel, H. , & Gallagher, J. (1999). Evolution and analysis of model CPGs for walking II: General principles and individual variability . Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 7 (2), 119–147 .
5.
Beer, R. , & Gallagher, J. (1992). Evolving dynamical neural networks for adaptive behavior . Adaptive Behavior, 1, 94–110 .
6.
Bollobás, B. (1985). Random graphs. Academic Press, London .
7.
Braitenberg, V. (1984). Vehicles: experiments in synthetic psychology. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA .
8.
Cannings, C. , & Penman, C. (2002). Random graphs. In C. Rao & D. Shanbhag, D. (Eds.), Stochastic processes: modelling and simulation, Vol. 21. Handbook of statistics series. Amsterdam: Elsevier .
9.
Chiel, H. , Beer, R. , & Gallagher, J. (1999). Evolution and analysis of model CPGs for walking I: Dynamical modules . Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 7 (2), 99–118 .
10.
Crutchfield, J. , & Young, K. (1995). Inferring statistical complexity . Physical Review E, 59, 275–283 .
11.
Csicsvari, J. , Henze, D. , Jamieson, B. , Harris, K. , Sirota, A. , Bartho, P. , Wise, K. , & Buzsaki, G. (2003). Massively parallel recording of unit and local field potentials with silico-based electrodes . Journal of Neurophysiology, 90 (2), 1314–1323 .
12.
Di Paolo, E. , Noble, J. , & Bullock, S. (2000). Simulation models as opaque thought experiments. In M. Bedau , J. McCaskill , N. Packard , & S. Rasmussen (Eds.), Artificial Life VII: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on the Simulation and Synthesis of Living Systems (pp. 497–506). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
13.
Fletcher, J. , Zwick, M. , & Bedau, M. (1998). Effect of environmental texture on evolutionary adaptation. In C. Adami , R. Belew , H. Kitano , & C. Taylor (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Life (pp. 189–199). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
14.
Floreano, D. , & Mondada, F. (1996). Evolution of plastic neurocontrollers for situated agents. In P. Maes , M. Mataric , J. Meyer , J. Pollack , & S. Wilson , (Eds.), From Animals to Animats 4: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behavior (pp. 401–410). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
15.
Godfrey-Smith, P. (1996). Complexity and the function of mind in nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
16.
Hamilton, J. (1994). Time series analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press .
17.
Husbands, P. , Smith, T. , Jakobi, N. , & O’Shea, M. (1998). Better living through chemistry: Evolving GasNets for robot control . Connection Science, 10 (3/4), 185–211 .
18.
Kaufman, S. (1993). The origins of order. Self-organisation and selection in evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
19.
Latora, V. , & Marchiori, M. (2001). Effcient behavior of smallworld networks . Physical Review Letters, 87 (19), 198701-198701 .
20.
Lindgren, K. (1991). Evolutionary phenomena in simple dynamics. In C. Langton , J. Farmer , S. Rasmussen , & C. Taylor (Eds.), Artificial life II, vol. XVI of Santa Fe Institute studies in the sciences of complexity (pp. 295–312). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley .
21.
Menczer, F. , & Belew, R. (1996). From complex environments to complex behaviours . Adaptive Behavior, 4 (3/4), 309–355 .
22.
Mitchell, M. (1997). An introduction to genetic algorithms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
23.
Newman, M. (2001). Who is the best connected scientist? A study of scientific coauthorship networks . Physical Review E, 64, 016131. cond-mat/0011144.
24.
Newman, M. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks . SIAM Review, 45 (2), 167–256 .
25.
Nolfi, S. , & Floreano, D. (2000). Evolutionary robotics: the biology, intelligence, and technology of self-organizing machines. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
26.
Papoulis, A. , & Pillai, S. (2002). Probability, random variables, and stochastic processes (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill .
27.
Port, R. , & van Gelder, T. (1995). Mind as motion: explorations in the dynamics of cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
28.
Read Montague, P. , Gally, J. , & Edelman, G. (1991). Spatial signalling in the development and function of neuronal connections . Cerebral Cortex, 1, 199–220 .
29.
Seth, A. (1997). Interaction, uncertainty, and the evolution of complexity. In P. Husbands & I. Harvey (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Artificial Life (pp. 521–530). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
30.
Seth, A. (1998). The evolution of complexity and the value of variability. In C. Adami , R. Belew , H. Kitano , & C. Taylor (Eds.), Artificial Life VI: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on the Simulation and Synthesis of Living Systems (pp. 209–221). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
31.
Seth, A. (2000). On the relations between behaviour, mechanism, and environment: explorations in artificial evolution. PhD Thesis, University of Sussex.
32.
Shannon, C. , & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press .
33.
Shibata, T. , Vijayakumar, S. , Conradt, J. , & Schaal, S. (2001). Biomimetic oculomotor control . Adaptive Behavior, 9 (4), 189–209 .
34.
Simon, H. (1988). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
35.
Smith, T. , Husbands, P. , Philippides, A. , & O’Shea, M. (2002). Neuronal plasticity and temporal adaptivity: GasNet robot control networks . Adaptive Behavior, 10 (3/4), 161–183 .
36.
Sporns, O. (2002). Graph theory methods for the analysis of neural connectivity patterns. In R. Kötter (Ed.), Neuroscience databases, A practical guide (pp. 169–183). Boston, MA: Kluwer Publishers .
37.
Sporns, O. , Tononi, G. , & Edelman, G. (2000). Theoretical neuroanatomy: Relating anatomical and functional connectivity in graphs and cortical connection matrices . Cerebral Cortex, 10, 127–141 .
38.
Strogatz, S. (1994). Nonlinear dynamics and chaos. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books .
39.
Thompson, W. (1917). On growth and form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
40.
Todd, P. , & Yanco, H. (1996). Environmental effects on minimal behaviors in the minimat world . Adaptive Behavior, 4 (3/4), 365–413 .
41.
Tononi, G. , Sporns, O. , & Edelman, G. (1994). A measure for brain complexity: Relating functional segregation and integration in the nervous system . Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA, 91, 5033–5037 .
42.
Watts, D. , & Strogatz, S. (1998). Collective dynamics of “small world” networks . Nature, 393, 440–442 .
43.
Young, R. (1970). Mind, brain, and adaptation in the nineteenth century. Oxford: Clarendon Press .
