Albert, R., & Othmer, H.G. (2003). The topology of the regulatory interactions predicts the expression pattern of the segment polarity genes in Drosophila melanogaster . Journal Theoretical Biology, 223, 1-18.
2.
Beer, R.D. (1996). Toward the evolution of dynamical neural networks for minimally cognitive behavior. In P. Maes, M. Mataric, J. Meyer, J. Pollack , & S. Wilson (Eds.), From Animals to Animats 4: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior (pp. 421-429). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3.
Beer, R.D. (2003a). The dynamics of active categorical perception in an evolved model agent. Adaptive Behavior, 11, 209-243.
4.
Beer, R.D. (2003b). Arches and stones in cognitive architecture. Adaptive Behavior, 11, 299-305.
5.
Beer, R.D. (2008). The dynamics of brain-body-environment systems: A status report. In P. Calvo & A. Gomila (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive science: An embodied approach (pp. 99-120). Elsevier.
6.
Beer, R.D., Chiel, H.J., & Gallagher, J.C. (1999). Evolution and analysis of model CPGs for walking II. General principles and individual variability . Journal of Computational Neuroscience , 7(2), 119-147.
7.
Beer, R.D., Kacmarcik, G.J., Ritzmann, R.E., & Chiel, H.J. (1991). A model of distributed sensorimotor control in the cockroach escape turn. In R. P. Lippman , J. Moody, & D. S. Touretzky (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems 3 (pp. 507-513). Morgan Kaufmann .
8.
Brush, S.G. (1967). History of the Lenz-Ising model. Reviews of Modern Physics, 39, 883-893.
9.
Carlip, S. (1998). Quantum gravity in 2+1 dimensions. Cambridge University Press.
10.
Chiel, H.J., Beer, R.D., & Gallagher, J.C. (1999). Evolution and analysis of model CPGs for walkingI. Dynamical modules. Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 7(2), 99-118.
11.
Ciliberti, S., Martin, O.C., & Wagner, A. (2007). Robustness can evolve gradually in complex regulatory gene networks with varying topology. PLoS Computational Biology , 3(2), e15. DOI:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030015
12.
Cohen, J.E. (2004). Mathematics is biology's next microscope, only better; biology is mathematics' next physics, only better. PLoS Biology, 2(12), e439. DOI:10.1371/ journal.pbio.0020439
13.
De Schutter, E. (2008). Reviewing multi-disciplinary papers: A challenge in neuroscience? Neuroinformatics, 6, 253-255.
14.
Ellner, S.P., & Guckenheimer, J. (2006). Dynamical models in biology . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15.
Epstein, J.M. (2008). Why model? Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation11(4), 12. Retrieved from http:/ /jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/11/4/12.html
16.
Fernández, P., & Solé, R.V. (2006). The role of computation in complex regulatory networks. In E. V. Koonin, Y. I. Wolf, & G. P. Karev (Eds.), Power laws, scale-free networks and genome biology (pp. 206-225). Berlin: Springer .
17.
Fitzhugh, R. (1961). Impulses and physiological states in theoretical models of nerve membrane. Biophysical Journal, 1, 445-466.
18.
Goldman, M.S., Golowasch, J., Marder, E., & Abbott, L.F. (2001). Global structure, robustness, and modulation of neuronal models. Journal of Neuroscience, 21(14), 5229- 5238.
19.
Golowasch, J., Goldman, M.S., Abbott, L.F., & Marder, E. (2002). Failure of averaging in the construction of a conductance-based neuron model. Journal of Neurophysiology , 87, 1129-1131.
20.
Harnad, S. (Ed.) (1987). Categorical perception: The groundwork of cognition. Cambridge University Press.
21.
Hinton, G.E., & Nowlan, S.J. (1987). How learning can guide evolution. Complex Systems, 1, 495-502.
22.
Izhikevich, E.M. (2007). Dynamical systems in neuroscience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23.
Kauffman, S.A. (1969). Metabolic stability and epigenesis in randomly constructed genetic nets. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 22, 437-467.
24.
Krauss, L.M. (1993). Fear of physics. Basic Books .
25.
Lazebnik, Y. (2004). Can a biologist fix a radio? - Or, what I learned while studying apoptosis. Cancer Cell, 2, 179- 182.
26.
Marder, E., & Abbott, L.F. (1995). Theory in motion. Current Biology , 5, 832-840.
27.
Maynard Smith, J. (1987). When learning guides evolution. Nature, 329, 761-762.
28.
McCollum, G. (2000). Social barriers to a theoretical neuroscience . Trends in Neurosciences, 23, 334-336.
29.
Prinz, A.A., Bucher, D., & Marder, E. (2004). Similar network activity from disparate circuit parameters. Nature Neuroscience, 7(12), 1345-1352.
30.
Psujek, S., & Beer, R.D. (2008). Developmental bias in evolution: Evolutionary accessibility of phenotypes in a model evo-devo system. Evolution and Development, 10, 375-390.
31.
Reeve, R.E., & Webb, B.H. (2003). New neural circuits for robot phonotaxis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A, 361, 2245-2266.
32.
Slocum, A.C., Downey, D.C., & Beer, R.D. (2000). Further experiments in the evolution of minimally cognitive behavior: From perceiving affordances to selective attention. In J. Meyer, A. Berthoz, D. Floreano, H. Roitblat, & S. Wilson (Eds.), From Animals to Animats 6: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior (pp. 430-439). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33.
Sutton, G.P., Mangan, E.V., Neustadter, D.M., Beer, R.D., Crago, P.E., & Chiel, H.J. (2004). Neural control exploits changing mechanical advantage and context dependence to generate different feeding responses in Aplysia . Biological Cybernetics, 91, 333-345.
34.
Synder, V.A., Sutton, G.P., Neustadter, D.M., Beer, R.D., & Chiel, H.J. (2006). Mechanical reconfiguration mediates swallowing and rejection in Aplysia californica. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 192, 857-870.
35.
Ward, R., & Ward, R. (2008). Selective attention and the control of action: Comparative psychology of an artificial evolved agent and people. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34(5), 1165-1182.
36.
Webb, B.H. (1995). Using robots to model animals: A cricket test . Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 16, 117-134.
37.
Williams, P.L., Beer, R.D., & Gasser, M. (2008). An embodied dynamical approach to relational categorization . In B. C. Love, K. McRae, & V. M. Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 223-228).
