Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):631-632 (1998)
|Abstract||Van Gelder's example of a dynamical model is a Perceptron. The similarity of dynamical models and Perceptrons in turn exemplifies the close relationship between dynamical and algorithmic models. Both are models, not literal descriptions of brains. The brain states of standard modeling are better conceived as processes in the dynamical sense, but algorithmic models remain useful.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jean Petitot (1998). Dynamical Modeling and Morphological Analysis. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):649-649.
Arthur B. Markman (2001). Are Dynamical Systems the Answer? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (1):50-51.
Joel Walmsley (2008). Explanation in Dynamical Cognitive Science. Minds and Machines 18 (3):331-348.
Chris Eliasmith (1998). Dynamical Models and Van Gelder's Dynamicism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):639-639.
Derek Harter, Arthur C. Graesser & Stan Franklin (2001). Bridging the Gap: Dynamics as a Unified View of Cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (1):45-46.
Randall D. Beer (1998). Framing the Debate Between Computational and Dynamical Approaches to Cognitive Science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):630-630.
David M. Kaplan & William Bechtel (2011). Dynamical Models: An Alternative or Complement to Mechanistic Explanations? Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (2):438-444.
Nick Chater & Ulrike Hahn (1998). What is the Dynamical Hypothesis? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):633-634.
Terence Horgan & John Tienson (1998). Resisting the Tyranny of Terminology: The General Dynamical Hypothesis in Cognitive Science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):643-643.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?