Guide to Simulation Run Graphic: The simulation runs show ME (memory element) activation, production matching and production firing during activation of the two concepts. Red circles indicate activation of a ME, the diameter of the circle is an approximate indicator of activation level. Green squares show matching productions, red squares show matching productions that were selected during conflict resolution. Structural relationships between MEs are indicated by black lines. Red lines are production match inputs.

Key to Active Memory ElementsConcrete Concept ‘Ball’

Visual Module

1 = visual representation of generic ball

Oculomotor Module

1 = search for match to visual rep of ball

Manual Module

2 = motor plan for kicking a football (1, 3 are sub-actions)

4 = motor plan for holding a ball (5 is a sub-action)

Tactile Module

1, 2 = sequence of sensation from kicking a football

Speech Module

3 = speech plan for word ‘ball’ (1, 2 are phonemes)

4 = speech plan for sentence with ‘ball’ as object

5 = speech plan for word ‘kick’

6 = last phoneme in word ‘Round’

Auditory Module

1 = word ‘ball’, 2 = word ‘round’, 3 = word ‘kick’

Abstract Concept ‘Democracy’

Speech Module

4 = speech plan for word ‘democracy’ (1,2, 3 are phonemes, note not all phonemes represented)

5 = speech plan for sentence with ‘democracy’ as object (is not elaborated directly, only indirectly)

6 = speech plan for sentence with ‘democracy’ as description

7 = phoneme/word ‘is’

8 = speech plan for word ‘UK’

Auditory Module

1 = word ‘democracy’

2 = word ‘vote’

3 = phrase ‘is a’

4 = word ‘UK’

Conceptual Representation in GLAM-PS - a Computationally Implemented Grounded/Embodied Cognitive Architecture

Gareth Miles - University of Glamorgan

Contact: Dr. Gareth Miles, Faculty of Humanities and Social Science, University of Glamorgan, Pontypridd, CF37 1DL (Email: gmiles@glam.ac.uk)

GLAM-PS So Far… - Models of Problem Solving

The first two tasks modelled in GLAM-PS were problem solving domains. These were the Tower of London (Miles, 2009) and algebra (Miles, In Preparation).

Both models demonstrate that amodal and explicit goal representations are not needed to model simple problem solving behaviour (in these domains). Control of behaviour is achieved in these models through the structuring of behaviour using i.) external information (cf. Minimal Control Principle, Taatgen, 2007), ii.) internal modal information and iii.) internal modal simulation. It is argued that by extending Taatgen’s Minimal Control Principle to include internal modal states (as well as external states) the need for additional representations (i.e. goals) is avoided. In this work executive function is fully embodied / grounded.

The Structure of the GLAM-PS Cognitive Architecture is Diagrammed Below (note only a selection of modules is included)

Modelling Conceptual Representation in GLAM-PS

GLAM-PS has no separate semantic memory. As an Architecture much of its knowledge about concrete concepts is based on perceptual and motor representation (cf. Perceptual Symbol Systems, Barsalou, 1999). Unlike in Barsalou (1999) the representation of concrete concepts is strongly influenced by language (but this language is in turn reflective of activated perceptual and motor representations). The same representational system is used to represent abstract concepts, but no or very few perceptual or motor representations are used - so language alone guides the elaboration of abstract concepts.

However – in GLAM-PS all language, including phonological representations of language, is considered to be either a product of sensory analysis (i.e perceptual) or a representation of motor capability (i.e. motor).

*** In GLAM-PS all language is Embodied ***

Language Representation in GLAM-PS

Architectural Features. There are certain features of language representation in GLAM-PS that emerge directly from the architecture, these are:

1.Heard Language and Spoken Language are represented in separate modules (see diagram to left)

2.Heard Language can be simulated

3.Spoken Language can be represented without being enacted (i.e. spoken out loud)

Model Features. In addition, the model of language representation developed in GLAM-PS thus far shows other features. These reflect constraints from the Architecture of GLAM-PS, but are not necessary consequences of the Architecture.

1.Lexical access is governed primarily by the Auditory Input/Heard Language module

2.Grammar is governed primarily by the Speech Output module

3.The core units of representation in the Auditory Input/Heard Language module are discreet words

4.The core units of representation in the Speech Output module are phonemes

5.There is redundancy. Some lexical access is possible from the Speech Output module, and grammatical information is derivable within the Auditory Input/Heard Language module.

Implementing Concept Representation in GLAM-PS: A multi-modal cascade model

1.Knowledge about each concept is represented in production rules within one or more modules.2.The external prompt for a concept will trigger only a few of these productions3.Each concept-related production executed will typically add memory information (i.e. memory elements) that will in turn allow more concept-related productions to match4.Inter-module communication makes available the contents of each modules working memory to all other modules, this information can be used to match or inhibit other concept-related productions. 5.The number of productions matching each cycle will increase (cascading) until the working memory of each relevant module is saturated or no new productions are left to fire6.Perceptual categories and motor capability categories can be derived, but only strictly within a module, [see here for more detail on 6.]7.Language will play a role in most concept representation. During the representation of concrete concepts language will tend to follow (and be dominated by) perceptual/motor representations (see Run 1 below). When abstract concepts are represented, language will be generated without the guidance and influence of non-language representations (see Run 2 below) – elaboration using language will be weaker (production values in conflict resolution will be lower) but more diverse.(as weak productions may match)

Sensory Analysis

Working Memory

Production Memory (LTM)

Tactile Input Module

Motor Programming

Working Memory

Production Memory (LTM)

Oculomotor Output Module

Motor Programming

Working Memory

Production Memory (LTM)

Speech Output Module

Sensory Analysis

Working Memory

Production Memory (LTM)

Auditory Input Module

Sensory Analysis

Working Memory

Production Memory (LTM)

Visual Input Module

Motor Programming

Working Memory

Production Memory (LTM)

Manual Output Module

Simulation of Module Activity During Activation of a Concrete Concept and an Abstract Concept

The figure below shows module activity following the auditory presentation of the words ‘Ball’ (Run 1) and ‘Democracy’ (Run 2). Inter-module communication delay is set to 4 cycles in this example.

Baraslou (2009, 2010) has highlighted the need for computationally implemented accounts of Grounded/Embodied Cognition. Some attempts to fulfil this need have emerged recently (McRae & Fischer, 2010). GLAM-PS (Glamorgan Problem Solver) is a Cognitive Architecture that takes a different approach, by using a production system formalism similar to that found in ACT-r (Anderson, 2007) and SOAR (Newell, 1990). This helps to highlight the theoretical differences between Grounded/Embodied Cognition and currently dominant accounts of Cognition (i.e. ACT-r).

Technical Details of GLAM-PS Grounded Cognitive Architecture:1.Production rules can match to the presence or absence of Memory Elements (MEs) within their own Working Memory (immediate updating) and in the Working Memory of all other modules (updating delayed by inter-module transmission). A maximum of two MEs from each module can match to each production rule.

2.Memory Elements (MEs) have activation levels that can be reduced or raised by production rules. A motor ME will be executed when a threshold level of activation is exceeded

3.All Input Module MEs only include information that could be derived from sensory input to that module

4.All Output Module MEs only include information that is representative of, or related to the motor capabilities of that module

5.Both Input and Output MEs can include information about their structural relationships with other MEs in the same module

6.Typically, MEs will be organised hierarchically within each modules Working Memory (sometimes in a multi-level hierarchy). For example into motor plans for manual action, speech plans, or perceptual groupings.

7.Both Input and Output MEs can include information on co-occurrence with other MEs from the same module and/or co-occurrence in structural relationships within that module (e.g. does the ME always play the same role within a representational hierarchy?). This analysis of co-occurrence allows information on perceptual category or motor capability category to be included in the representation of a ME. Information from other modules can never be used in the derivation of these categories.

Cycle 18 Cycle 14 Cycle 9 Cycle 5 Cycle 1

Sim

ulat

ion

Run

1‘B

AL

L’ (

conc

rete

)

Sim

ulat

ion

Run

2‘D

EM

OC

RA

CY

’ (ab

stra

ct)

‘Ball’ 1

democracy 1

1 P

P

P

P

P

P

P

1

P

P

1

1

P1

P 1

1 P

P

PP

P

P

P

1

P

P

1

1

1

P

1

23

4

2

3

4P

2

P 1

P

(1 ) ‘Visual Search’

1

P

P

PP

P

P

P1

P

P

1

1

1

P

1

23

4

2

3

4P

2

1

P

3P1

52

P

P

5

6

7P

P

PPP

2

P

1

P

P

PP

P

P

P

1

P

P

1

1

1

P

1

23

4

2

3

4

P

2

1

3P

1

52

P

5

6

7

PP

P2

P

8

3

4

PP

P

4

1

P

2

63