Slow but flexible or fast but rigid? Discrete and continuous processes compared
A tradeoff exists when dealing with complex tasks composed of multiple steps. High-level cognitive processes can find the best sequence of actions to achieve a goal in uncertain environments, but they are slow and require significant computational demand. In contrast, lower-level processing allows r...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2024-10-01
|
| Series: | Heliyon |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844024151602 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1846170150115475456 |
|---|---|
| author | Matteo Priorelli Ivilin Peev Stoianov |
| author_facet | Matteo Priorelli Ivilin Peev Stoianov |
| author_sort | Matteo Priorelli |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | A tradeoff exists when dealing with complex tasks composed of multiple steps. High-level cognitive processes can find the best sequence of actions to achieve a goal in uncertain environments, but they are slow and require significant computational demand. In contrast, lower-level processing allows reacting to environmental stimuli rapidly, but with limited capacity to determine optimal actions or to replan when expectations are not met. Through reiteration of the same task, biological organisms find the optimal tradeoff: from action primitives, composite trajectories gradually emerge by creating task-specific neural structures. The two frameworks of active inference – a recent brain paradigm that views action and perception as subject to the same free energy minimization imperative – well capture high-level and low-level processes of human behavior, but how task specialization occurs in these terms is still unclear. In this study, we compare two strategies on a dynamic pick-and-place task: a hybrid (discrete-continuous) model with planning capabilities and a continuous-only model with fixed transitions. Both models rely on a hierarchical (intrinsic and extrinsic) structure, well suited for defining reaching and grasping movements, respectively. Our results show that continuous-only models perform better and with minimal resource expenditure but at the cost of less flexibility. Finally, we propose how discrete actions might lead to continuous attractors and compare the two frameworks with different motor learning phases, laying the foundations for further studies on bio-inspired task adaptation. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-44eb2d21c6714da1986d70dfafe482d6 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2405-8440 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-10-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Heliyon |
| spelling | doaj-art-44eb2d21c6714da1986d70dfafe482d62024-11-12T05:19:51ZengElsevierHeliyon2405-84402024-10-011020e39129Slow but flexible or fast but rigid? Discrete and continuous processes comparedMatteo Priorelli0Ivilin Peev Stoianov1Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies, National Research Council of Italy, Padova, ItalyCorresponding author.; Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies, National Research Council of Italy, Padova, ItalyA tradeoff exists when dealing with complex tasks composed of multiple steps. High-level cognitive processes can find the best sequence of actions to achieve a goal in uncertain environments, but they are slow and require significant computational demand. In contrast, lower-level processing allows reacting to environmental stimuli rapidly, but with limited capacity to determine optimal actions or to replan when expectations are not met. Through reiteration of the same task, biological organisms find the optimal tradeoff: from action primitives, composite trajectories gradually emerge by creating task-specific neural structures. The two frameworks of active inference – a recent brain paradigm that views action and perception as subject to the same free energy minimization imperative – well capture high-level and low-level processes of human behavior, but how task specialization occurs in these terms is still unclear. In this study, we compare two strategies on a dynamic pick-and-place task: a hybrid (discrete-continuous) model with planning capabilities and a continuous-only model with fixed transitions. Both models rely on a hierarchical (intrinsic and extrinsic) structure, well suited for defining reaching and grasping movements, respectively. Our results show that continuous-only models perform better and with minimal resource expenditure but at the cost of less flexibility. Finally, we propose how discrete actions might lead to continuous attractors and compare the two frameworks with different motor learning phases, laying the foundations for further studies on bio-inspired task adaptation.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844024151602 |
| spellingShingle | Matteo Priorelli Ivilin Peev Stoianov Slow but flexible or fast but rigid? Discrete and continuous processes compared Heliyon |
| title | Slow but flexible or fast but rigid? Discrete and continuous processes compared |
| title_full | Slow but flexible or fast but rigid? Discrete and continuous processes compared |
| title_fullStr | Slow but flexible or fast but rigid? Discrete and continuous processes compared |
| title_full_unstemmed | Slow but flexible or fast but rigid? Discrete and continuous processes compared |
| title_short | Slow but flexible or fast but rigid? Discrete and continuous processes compared |
| title_sort | slow but flexible or fast but rigid discrete and continuous processes compared |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844024151602 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT matteopriorelli slowbutflexibleorfastbutrigiddiscreteandcontinuousprocessescompared AT ivilinpeevstoianov slowbutflexibleorfastbutrigiddiscreteandcontinuousprocessescompared |