Selective attention enables action selection: evidence from evolutionary robotics experiments

In this paper we investigate whether selective attention enables the development of action selection (i.e. the ability to select among conflicting actions afforded by the current agent/environmental context). By carrying out a series of experiments in which neuro-robots have been evolved for the ability to forage so to maximize the energy that can be extracted from ingested substances we observed that effective action and action selection capacities can be developed even in the absence of internal mechanisms specialized for action selection. However, the comparison of the results obtained in different experimental conditions in which the robots were or were not provided with internal modulatory connections demonstrate how selective attention enables the development of a more effective action selection capacity and of more effective and integrated action capacities.

[1]  Umberto Castiello,et al.  Dissociation of covert and overt spatial attention during prehension movements: Selective interference effects , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

[2]  S. Tipper,et al.  Selective Reaching to Grasp: Evidence for Distractor Interference Effects , 1997 .

[3]  J. Riddoch,et al.  Visual affordances and object selection , 2001 .

[4]  Tony J. Prescott,et al.  Forced Moves or Good Tricks in Design Space? Landmarks in the Evolution of Neural Mechanisms for Action Selection , 2007, Adapt. Behav..

[5]  Tony J. Prescott,et al.  Optimised agent-based modelling of action selection , 2011 .

[6]  S. Jackson,et al.  Are non-relevant objects represented in working memory? The effect of non-target objects on reach and grasp kinematics , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[7]  Rodney A. Brooks,et al.  A Robust Layered Control Syste For A Mobile Robot , 2022 .

[8]  G Rizzolatti,et al.  Study of selective reaching and grasping in a patient with unilateral parietal lesion. Dissociated effects of residual spatial neglect. , 1993, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[9]  U. Castiello Mechanisms of selection for the control of hand action , 1999, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[10]  J. Michael Herrmann,et al.  Inhibition in the Dynamics of Selective Attention: An Integrative Model for Negative Priming , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[11]  Stefano Nolfi,et al.  Evorobot* - A Tool for Running Experiments on the Evolution of Communication , 2010, Evolution of Communication and Language in Embodied Agents.

[12]  Terry Wrigley Selection, selection, selection , 2006 .

[13]  Stefano Nolfi,et al.  Evolutionary Robotics: The Biology, Intelligence, and Technology of Self-Organizing Machines , 2000 .

[14]  S P Tipper,et al.  Action-based mechanisms of attention. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[15]  T. Prescott,et al.  Modelling Natural Action Selection: Index , 2011 .

[16]  Gregory M. Werner,et al.  Using second order neural connections for motivation of behavioral choices , 1994 .

[17]  J Miller,et al.  Electrophysiological evidence for temporal overlap among contingent mental processes. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[18]  W T Powers,et al.  Feedback: Beyond Behaviorism , 1973, Science.

[19]  U. Bässler,et al.  Pattern generation for stick insect walking movements—multisensory control of a locomotor program , 1998, Brain Research Reviews.

[20]  Tony J. Prescott Action selection , 2008, Scholarpedia.

[21]  M. Goldberg,et al.  Visuospatial and motor attention in the monkey , 1987, Neuropsychologia.

[22]  Domenico Parisi,et al.  Robots that have emotions , 2010, Adapt. Behav..

[23]  Stefano Nolfi,et al.  Evolution of Communication and Language in Embodied Agents , 2009 .

[24]  O. Neumann Beyond capacity: A functional view of attention , 1987 .

[25]  M. Gebhardt,et al.  Physiological characterisation of antennal mechanosensory descending interneurons in an insect (Gryllus bimaculatus, Gryllus campestris) brain. , 2001, The Journal of experimental biology.

[26]  B. Webb Neural mechanisms for prediction: do insects have forward models? , 2004, Trends in Neurosciences.

[27]  A. Büschges,et al.  Phase-dependent presynaptic modulation of mechanosensory signals in the locust flight system. , 1999, Journal of neurophysiology.

[28]  Toby Tyrrell The Use of Hierarchies for Action Selection , 1993, Adapt. Behav..

[29]  Francesco Mondada,et al.  The e-puck, a Robot Designed for Education in Engineering , 2009 .

[30]  P. Redgrave,et al.  An embodied model of action selection mechanisms in the vertebrate brain , 2000 .

[31]  S. Tipper,et al.  Hand deviations away from visual cues: Indirect evidence for inhibition , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[32]  Domenico Parisi,et al.  The strategic level and the tactical level of behaviour , 2010 .

[33]  J. Gibson The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1979 .

[34]  B. Kopell,et al.  The Stroop effect: brain potentials localize the source of interference. , 1981, Science.

[35]  Sean A. Rands,et al.  Modelling natural action selection , 2012 .

[36]  Toby Tyrell,et al.  The use of hierarchies for action selection , 1993 .

[37]  Pattie Maes,et al.  Situated agents can have goals , 1990, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[38]  U. Castiello Grasping a fruit: selection for action. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[39]  F. Clarac,et al.  Monosynaptic Interjoint Reflexes and their Central Modulation During Fictive Locomotion in Crayfish , 1991, The European journal of neuroscience.