This article presents a scheme for learning a cognitive map of a maze from a sequence of views and movement decisions. The scheme is based on an intermediate representation called the view graph, whose nodes correspond to the views whereas the labeled edges represent the movements leading from one view to another. By means of a graph theoretical reconstruction method, the view graph is shown to carry complete information on the topological and directional structure of the maze. Path planning can be carried out directly in the view graph without actually performing this reconstruction. A neural network is presented that learns the view graph during a random exploration of the maze. lt is based on an unsupervised competitive learning rule translating temporal sequence (rather than similarity) of views into connectedness in the network. The network uses its knowledge of the topological and directional structure of the maze to generate expectations about which views are likely to be encountered next, improving the view-recognition performance. Numerical simulations illustrate the network's ability for path planning and the recognition of views degraded by random noise. The results are compared to findings of behavioral neuroscience.
Barto, A.G., & Sutton, R.S. (1981). Landmark learning: An illustration of associative search. Biological Cybernetics, 42, 1-8.
2.
Braitenberg, V., & Schüz, A. (1983). Some anatomical comments on the hippocampus. In W Seifert (Ed.), Neurobiology of the hippocampusLondon : Academic Press.
3.
Brooks, R.A. (1987). Autonomous mobile robots. In W E. L. Grimson & R. S. Patil (Eds.), AI in the 1980s and beyond. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4.
Bülthoff, H.H., & Edelman, S. (1992). Psychophysical support for a 2-D view interpolation theory of object recognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 89, 60-64.
5.
Burgess, N., Recce, M., & O'Keefe, J. (1994). A model of hippocampal function. Neural Networks, 7, 1065-1081.
6.
Cartwright, B.A., & Collett, T.S. (1987). Landmark maps for honeybees. Biological Cybernetics, 57, 85-93.
7.
Cheng, K., & Gallistel, C.R. (1984). Testing the geometric power of an animal's spatial representation. In H. L. Roitblat, T. G. Bever, & H. S. Terrace (Eds.), Animal cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8.
Dartsch, S., & Mallot, H.A. (1995). Psychophysical measurement of distance in cognitive maps: Metric vs. topological organization. In N. Elsner & R. Menzel (Eds.), Learning and Memory: Proceedings of the Twenty- Third Göttingen Neurobiology Stuttgart Conference (abstr. No. 47). Stüttgart : Thieme-Verlag.
9.
Edelman, S., & Weinshall, D. (1991). A self-organizing multiple-view representation of 3D objects. Biological Cybernetics, 64, 209-220.
10.
Eichenbaum, H., & Cohen, N.J. (1988). Representation in the hippocampus: What do hippocampal neurons code? Trends in Neurosciences, 11, 244-248.
11.
Eichenbaum, H., Wiener, S.I., Shapiro, M.L., & Cohen, N.J. (1989). The organization of spatial coding in the hippocampus: A study of neural ensemble activity. Journal of Neuroscience , 9, 2764-2775.
12.
Floreano, D., & Mondada, F. (1994). Autonomous and self-sufficient: Emergent homing behaviour in a mobile robot (Tech. Rep. No. R94.141). Lausanne: LAMI, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology .
Gallistel, C.R. (1990). The organization of learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15.
Held, R. (1965). Plasticity in sensory-motor systems. Scientific American, 213, 84-94.
16.
(Cited after E.B. Goldstein (1984), Sensation and perception . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.)
17.
Hetherington, P.A., & Shapiro, M.L. (1993). A simple network model simulates hippocampal place fields: II. Computing goal-directed trajectories and memory fields. Behavioral Neuroscience, 107, 434-443.
18.
Kohonen, T. (1982). Self-organized formation of topologically correct feature maps. Biological Cybernetics, 43, 59-69.
19.
MacFarlane, D.A. (1930). The role of kinesthesis in maze learning. University of California Publications in Psychology, 4, 277-305. (Cited after H. Roitblat (1994), Mechanism and process in animal behaviour. In D. Cliff, P. Husbands, J.-A. Meyer , & S. W Wilson (Eds.), From animals to animats 3. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
McClelland, J.L., McNaughton, B.L., & O'Reilly, R.C. (1994). Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: Insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory (Tech. Rep. No. PDP.CNS.94.1). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University.
22.
McNaughton, B.L. (1989). Neuronal mechanisms for spatial computation and information storage. In L. Nadel, L. A. Cooper, P. Culicover , & R. M. Harnish (Eds.), Neural connections, mental computation. London : MIT Press.
23.
McNaughton, B.L., Barnes, C.A., & O'Keefe, J. (1983). The contributions of position, direction, and velocity to single unit activity in the hippocampus of freely moving rats . Experimental Brain Research, 52, 41-49.
24.
McNaughton, B.L., Mizumori, S. J. Y, Barnes, C.A., Leonard, B.J., Marquis, M., & Green, E.J. (1994). Cortical representation of motion during unrestrained spatial navigation in the rat. Cerebral Cortex, 4, 27-39.
25.
McNaughton, B.L., & Nadel, L. (1990). Hebb-Marr networks and the neurobiological representation of action in space. In M. A. Gluck & D. E. Rumelhart (Eds.), Neuroscience and connectionist theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26.
Muller, R.U., & Kubie, J.L. (1989). The firing of hippocampal place cells predicts the future position of freely moving rats. Journal of Neuroscience , 9, 4101-4110.
27.
Nehmzow, U., & McGonigle, B. (1994). Achieving rapid adaption in robots by means of external tuition. In D. Cliff, P Husbands, J.-A. Meyer, & S. W Wilson (Eds.), From animals to animats 3. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28.
O'Keefe, J. (1979). A review of the hippocampal place cells. Progress in Neurobiology, 13, 419-439.
29.
O'Keefe, J. (1991). The hippocampal cognitive map and navigational strategies. In J. Paillard (Ed.), Brain and space. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
30.
O'Keefe, J., & Speakman, A. (1987). Single unit activity in the rat hippocampus during a spatial memory task. Experimental Brain Research, 68, 1-27.
31.
Prescott, T.J. (1994). Spatial learning and representation in animats . In D. Cliff, P. Husbands, J.-A. Meyer, & S. W Wilson (Eds.), From animals to animats 3. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32.
Roitblat, H.L. (1982). The meaning of representation in animal memory . Behavioural & Brain Sciences, 5, 353-406.
33.
Schmajuk, N.A., & Thieme, A.D. (1992). Purposive behavior and cognitive mapping : A neural network model. Biological Cybernetics, 67, 165-174.
34.
Schölkopf, B., Georg, P., & Mallot, H.A. (1995). Perception and action in view-based maze navigation . Abstracts of the 18th European Conference on Visual Perception, Tübingen, Germany. In press.
35.
Tani, J., & Fukumura, N. (1994). Learning goal-directed sensory-based navigation of a mobile robot. Neural Networks, 7, 553-563.
36.
Tolman, E.C. (1932). Purposive behavior in animals and men. New York: The Century Co.
37.
Touretzky, D.S., Wan, H.S., & Redish, A.D. (1994). Neural representation of space in rats and robots . In J. M. Zurada, R. J. Marks II, & C. J. Robinson (Eds.), Computational intelligence: Imitating life. Proceedings of the symposium held at the 1994 IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence . Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.
38.
Wagner, K. (1970). Graphentheorie. Mannheim, Germany: Bibliographisches Institut.
39.
Wehner, R., & Menzel, R. (1990). Do insects have cognitive maps? Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13, 403-414.
