Früher|Nächster

Cognitive logic and map construction model of machine maps

  • role： First author第一作者
  • Affiliation：

    School of Geospatial Information, SSF Information Engineering University, Zhengzhou 450001, China

  • Email：fljia_ieu@126.com
  • Introduction：贾奋励，研究方向为空间认知与机器地图、全息地图与虚拟地理环境。E-mail：fljia_ieu@126.com
JIA Fenli,  
  • Affiliation：

    School of Geospatial Information, SSF Information Engineering University, Zhengzhou 450001, China

YANG Jian,  
  • role： Corresponding author通信作者
  • Affiliation：

    School of Geospatial Information, SSF Information Engineering University, Zhengzhou 450001, China

  • Email：youarexiong@163.com
  • Introduction：游雄，研究方向为地图学、作战环境学。E-mail：youarexiong@163.com
YOU Xiong*,  
  • Affiliation：

    School of Geospatial Information, SSF Information Engineering University, Zhengzhou 450001, China

LI Ke,  
  • Affiliation：

    School of Geospatial Information, SSF Information Engineering University, Zhengzhou 450001, China

TIAN Jiangpeng,  
  • Affiliation：

    School of Geospatial Information, SSF Information Engineering University, Zhengzhou 450001, China

ZHENG Shulei

Resümee

Unmanned platforms are rapidly being used in many different fields. However, improving their cognition and understanding of complex environments remains a challenging research problem. Machine maps are a new class of maps proposed to address this problem. Based on the conceptual model of the machine map, this paper adopts the research perspective of cognitive science and further proposes a theoretical model of the machine map’s construction, which is cognitive, plausible, and consistent with the cognitive structure. This paper first discusses the theoretical roots of machine maps in cognitive science in terms of the origin, formation, and development of machine maps. Second, this paper briefly reviews the research on the structure and generation of memory models, mental image maps, cognitive architectures, and environmental cognition issues of robotic systems. Furthermore, it discusses the cognitive structure of the machine map and its supporting role in the map construction model of machine maps. Third, this paper proposes the design principles of the machine map’s construction model, which includes the organization of environment information using distributed representations, structural design of the machine map using a multistore memory system, and modeling of the generation of the machine map with a reference of brain cognitive activities. Furthermore, this paper presents the task objectives, content classification, detailed logical structure, and generation of the machine map’s construction. The perceptual map conducts preliminary processing of information acquired by sensors to obtain information about the features, location, geometry, and semantics of entities in the surrounding environment. The working map is functionally similar to the working memory in human brains, which contains visual information, spatial information, situational information, and specialized maps constructed to accomplish specific tasks. The long-time map uses perceptual map and working map as information sources, and the fragmented information in the perceptual map and working map is associated, managed, and processed more extensively to form an environment model with global reference. Finally, the machine map generation’s primary activities (e.g., understanding, attention, inference, learning, and action) and processes (e.g., implicit map generation and explicit map generation) are discussed based on the logical structure. Implicit map generation refers to the process in which the content and knowledge in the long-term map are continuously enriched and accumulated through the continuous evolution and support of the perceptual map and the working map during the operation of the unmanned platform. This process contains three activities: shallow understanding, deep understanding, and implicit learning. Explicit map generation refers to the process in which the working map forms a specialized map for a given task to meet the specific task requirements and supports the generation of spatial behavior under the support of itself, perceptual map, and long-term map. The process consists of six activities: superficial understanding, inference, attention, deep understanding, episodic learning, and action. The cognitive structure and map construction model, which is an interpretation of the machine map cognitive computing system, can serve as a basic framework for researchers interested in the machine map, enabling them to carry out collaborative research at a more abstract level, and provide references for the integration, evaluation, and application of related technologies and data. This paper also describes new requirements and goals for constructing digital twin or virtual geographic environments.

Schlüsselwort

remote sensing;machine map;cognitive logic;map construction model;unmanned platform

References

  1. 1.
    Albus J S. 1991. Outline for a theory of intelligence. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 21(3): 473-509
  2. 2.
    Albus J S. 2010. Reverse engineering the brain. International Journal of Machine Consciousness, 2(2): 193-211
  3. 3.
    Anderson J R, Bothell D, Byrne M D, Douglass S, Lebiere C and Qin Y L. 2004. An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review, 111(4): 1036-1060
  4. 4.
    Atkinson R C and Shiffrin R M. 1968. Human memory: a proposed system and its control processes. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 2: 89-195
  5. 5.
    Baddeley A D and Hitch G. 1974. Working memory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 8: 47-89
  6. 6.
    Bao X H. 2014. Promotion Effect of Visual Long-Term Memory on Visual Short-Term Memory. Xi’an: Shaanxi Normal University
  7. 7.
    Behrens T E J, Muller T H, Whittington J C R, Mark S, Baram A B, Stachenfeld K L and Kurth-Nelson Z. 2018. What is a cognitive map? Organizing knowledge for flexible behavior. Neuron, 100(2): 490-509
  8. 8.
    Boeing. 2015-07-14. Meet Echo Seeker-Boeing's newest unmanned underwater vehicle goes deep, goes long[N/OL]. [2023-02-01]
  9. 9.
    Brady T F, Konkle T and Alvarez G A. 2011. A review of visual memory capacity: beyond individual items and toward structured representations. Journal of Vision, 11(5): 4
  10. 10.
    Chen J, Sun J and Wang G. 2022. From unmanned systems to autonomous intelligent systems. Engineering, 12: 16-19
  11. 11.
    Cohen G. 2000. Hierarchical models in cognition: do they have psychological reality?. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 12(1): 1-36
  12. 12.
    DARPA Subterranean (SubT) Challenge[N/OL]. [2023-02-01].
  13. 13.
    Ferbinteanu J. 2019. Memory systems 2018-Towards a new paradigm. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 157: 61-78
  14. 14.
    Gao J. 2017. The 60 anniversary and prospect of Acta Geodaetica et Cartographica Sinica. Acta Geodaetica et Cartographica Sinica, 46(10): 1219-1225
  15. 15.
    Gobet F, Lane P C R, Croker S, Cheng P C H, Jones G, Oliver I and Pine J M. 2001. Chunking mechanisms in human learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(6): 236-243
  16. 16.
    Greenauer N and Waller D. 2010. Micro- and macroreference frames: specifying the relations between spatial categories in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(4): 938-957
  17. 17.
    Hafting T, Fyhn M, Molden S, Moser M B and Moser E I. 2005. Microstructure of a spatial map in the entorhinal cortex. Nature, 436(7052): 801-806
  18. 18.
    Hirtle S C and Jonides J. 1985. Evidence of hierarchies in cognitive maps. Memory and Cognition, 13(3): 208- 217
  19. 19.
    Hu S C, Chen L, Wu P H, Li H Y, Yan J C and Tao D C. 2022. ST-P3: end-to-end vision-based autonomous driving via spatial-temporal feature learning//17th European Conference on Computer Vision. Tel Aviv: Springer: 533-549
  20. 20.
    Keinath A T. 2016. The preferred directions of conjunctive grid X head direction cells in the medial entorhinal cortex are periodically organized. PLoS ONE, 11(3): e0152041
  21. 21.
    Kim M and Maguire E A. 2018. Hippocampus, retrosplenial and parahippocampal cortices encode multicompartment 3D space in a hierarchical manner. Cerebral Cortex, 28(5): 1898-1909
  22. 22.
    Kotseruba I and Tsotsos J K. 2020. 40 years of cognitive architectures: core cognitive abilities and practical applications. Artificial Intelligence Review, 53(1): 17-94
  23. 23.
    Kugele S and Franklin S. 2021. Learning in LIDA. Cognitive Systems Research, 66: 176-200
  24. 24.
    Lehman J F, Laird J and Rosenbloom P. 2006. A gentle introduction to soar, an architecture for human cognition[EB/OL].
  25. 25.
    Lin H, Zhang C X, Chen M and Zheng X Q. 2016. On virtual geographic environments for geographic knowledge representation and sharing. Journal of Remote Sensing (in Chinese), 20(5): 1290-1298
  26. 26.
    Lu Z Y and Du J Z. 2005. Psychology of Memory. Beijing: People's Education Press
  27. 27.
    Lynch K. 1960. The Image of the City. Cambridge: MIT Press
  28. 28.
    Madl T, Franklin S, Chen K, Montaldi D and Trappl R. 2016a. Towards real-world capable spatial memory in the LIDA cognitive architecture. Biologically Inspired Cognitive Architectures, 16: 87-104
  29. 29.
    Madl T, Franklin S, Chen K and Trappl R. 2013. Spatial working memory in the LIDA cognitive architecture//The 12th International Conference on Cognitive Modelling. Ottawa: [s.n.]
  30. 30.
    Madl T, Franklin S, Chen K, Trappl R and Montaldi D. 2016b. Exploring the structure of spatial representations. PLoS ONE, 11(6): e0157343
  31. 31.
    McNamara T P. 1986. Mental representations of spatial relations. Cognitive Psychology, 18(1): 87-121
  32. 32.
    McNamara T P, Hardy J K and Hirtle S C. 1989. Subjective hierarchies in spatial memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(2): 211-227
  33. 33.
    Meilinger T, Riecke B E and Bülthoff H H. 2014. Local and global reference frames for environmental spaces. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(3): 542-569
  34. 34.
    Miller G A. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2): 81-97
  35. 35.
    Moser E I and Moser M B. 2013. Grid cells and neural coding in high-end cortices. Neuron, 80(3): 765-774
  36. 36.
    Nadel L. 2020. What is a memory that it can be changed?//Lane R D and Nadel L, eds. Neuroscience of Enduring Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 11-24
  37. 37.
    O’Keefe J and Dostrovsky J. 1971. The hippocampus as a spatial map. Preliminary evidence from unit activity in the freely-moving rat. Brain Research, 34(1): 171-175
  38. 38.
    O’Keefe J and Nadel L. 1978. The Hippocampus as a Cognitive Map. Oxford: Oxford University Press
  39. 39.
    O’Reilly R C. 1998. Six principles for biologically based computational models of cortical cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2(11): 455-462
  40. 40.
    Peng D L. 2019. General Psychology. 5th ed. Beijing: Beijing Normal University Publishing Group
  41. 41.
    Schultheis H and Barkowsky T. 2011. Casimir: an architecture for mental spatial knowledge processing. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3(4): 778-795
  42. 42.
    Sun R. 2007. The importance of cognitive architectures: an analysis based on CLARION. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 19(2): 159-193
  43. 43.
    Sun R. 2012. Memory systems within a cognitive architecture. New Ideas in Psychology, 30(2): 227-240
  44. 44.
    Tolman E C. 1948. Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review, 55(4): 189-208
  45. 45.
    Trafton J G, Hiatt L M, Harrison A M, Tanborello F P, Khemlani S S and Schultz A C. 2013. ACT-R/E: an embodied cognitive architecture for human-robot interaction. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, 2(1): 30-55
  46. 46.
    Tversky B. 1993. Cognitive maps, cognitive collages, and spatial mental models//Frank A U and Campari I, eds. Spatial Information Theory: A Theoretical Basis for GIS. Marciana Marina: Springer: 14-24
  47. 47.
    Uttal D H, Friedman A, Hand L L and Warren C. 2010. Learning fine-grained and category information in navigable real-world space. Memory and Cognition, 38(8): 1026-1040
  48. 48.
    Webb B. 2001. Can robots make good models of biological behaviour?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(6): 1033-1050
  49. 49.
    Whittington J C R, McCaffary D, Bakermans J J W and Behrens T E J. 2022. How to build a cognitive map. Nature Neuroscience, 25(10): 1257-1272
  50. 50.
    Wintermute S. 2009. An overview of spatial processing in Soar/SVS. CCA-TR-2009-01. Center for Cognitive Architecture University of Michigan
  51. 51.
    Yin P, Abuduweili A, Zhao S Q, Xu L Y, Liu C L and Scherer S. 2023. BioSLAM: a bioinspired lifelong memory system for general place recognition. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 39(6): 4855-4874
  52. 52.
    You X, Jia F L, Tian J P, Yang J and Li K. 2023. The machine map and its conceptual model. Journal of Geo-Information Science,

Lesen Sie die ganze Passage

The above content is generated by Large Model Translation. The translated content is for reference only. We do not assume any commercial or legal responsibilty for any consequences arising from the use of our website