Abstract
Computational intelligence algorithms are currently capable of dealing with simple cognitive processes, but still remain inefficient compared with the human brain’s ability to learn from few exemplars or to analyze problems that have not been defined in an explicit manner. Generalization and decision-making processes typically require an uncertainty model that is applied to the decision options while relying on the probability approach. Thus, models of such cognitive functions usually interact with reinforcement-based learning to simplify complex problems. Decision-makers are needed to choose from the decision options that are available, in order to ensure that the decision-makers’ choices are rational. They maximize the subjective overall utility expected, given by the outcomes in different states and weighted with subjective beliefs about the occurrence of those states. Beliefs are captured by probabilities and new information is incorporated using the Bayes’ law. Fuzzy-based models described in this paper propose a different – they may serve as a point of departure for a family of novel methods enabling more effective and neurobiologically reliable brain simulation that is based on fuzzy logic techniques and that turns out to be useful in both basic and applied sciences. The approach presented provides a valuable insight into understanding the aforementioned processes, doing that in a descriptive, fuzzy-based manner, without presenting a complex analysis
Publisher
National Institute of Telecommunications
Subject
Electrical and Electronic Engineering,Computer Networks and Communications
Reference47 articles.
1. [1] J. Olszak, M. Radom, and P. Formanowicz, "Some aspects of modeling and analysis of complex biological systems using time Petri nets", Bull. of the Polish Acad. of Sci.: Tech. Sci., vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 67-78, 2018 (DOI: 10.24425/119060).
2. [2] D. He, Z. Zheng, and L. Stone, "Detecting generalized synchrony: An improved approach", Phys. Rev. E, vol. 67, no. 2, 026223, 2003 (DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.67.026223).
3. [3] E. W. Lang, A.M. Toma, I. R. Keck, J. M. Gerriz-Scez, and C. G. Puntonet, "Brain connectivity analysis: A short survey", Comput. Intell. and Neurosci., vol. 2012, article ID 412512, pp. 1-21, 2012 (DOI: 10.1155/2012/412512).
4. [4] M. Krumin and S. Shoham, "Multivariate autoregressive modeling and granger causality analysis of multiple spike trains", Comput. Intell. and Neurosci., vol. 2010, article ID 752428, pp. 1-9, 2010 (DOI: 10.1155/2010/752428).
5. [5] Human Connectome Project [Online]. Available: www.humanconnectomeproject.org