Research.Manifesto History
Hide minor edits - Show changes to output
Added line 29:
!!Technical developments
Deleted lines 30-31:
!!Technical developments
Added line 1:
!!Theoretical developments
Deleted lines 3-4:
Added line 10:
!!Computational developments
Deleted lines 11-12:
!!Computational developments
Deleted lines 0-1:
Changed lines 3-4 from:
to:
!!Theoretical developments
Changed lines 13-14 from:
to:
!!Computational developments
Changed line 33 from:
to:
!!Technical developments
Changed lines 13-14 from:
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% {$ScriptUrl}/../pub/common/www.jpg
to:
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% Attach:www.jpg
Changed lines 33-34 from:
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% {$ScriptUrl}/../pub/research/interactivism/images/atome.gif
to:
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% Attach:atome.gif
Changed line 41 from:
* '''Software''' optimization, as the ideal parallel behavior can be efficiently approximated by carefully designed algorithms. When processes follow a given topology, integration and interpolation of activity can be reduced to nearby elements, the problem with complex and often chaotic systems being to define what ''near'' should mean. In the case of sensorimotor interactions, an adequate metrics is hard to define and we must rely on weaker notions of similarity.
to:
* '''Software''' optimization, as the ideal parallel behavior can be efficiently approximated by carefully designed algorithms. When processes follow a given topology, integration and interpolation of activity can be reduced to nearby elements, the problem with complex and often chaotic systems being to define what ''near'' should mean. In the case of sensorimotor interactions, an adequate metrics is hard to define and we must rely on weaker notions of similarity.
Changed line 3 from:
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% [[Attach:bacterie.jpg]]
to:
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% Attach:bacterie.jpg
Changed line 3 from:
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% {$ScriptUrl}/../pub/research/interactivism/images/bacterie.jpg
to:
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% [[Attach:bacterie.jpg]]
Changed lines 1-25 from:
[[ResearchFr|(French version here)]]
Social regulation of cognition and implicit social cognition
Myresearch adopts a person by situation perspective to examine cognitive performance. The broad idea is that high-stakes testing situations are differently experienced depending on:
*the social group to which one belongs (as in stereotype threat)
*the type of achievement goals one pursues
*the social value of these goals
*and/or individual differences variables, such as working memory capacity (which moderates stereotype threat and choking under pressure effects)
These diverging subjective experiences influence, in turn, cognitive performance.
Because some experiences and thoughts are not always available for introspection, and hence cannot be reported explicitly, I am also very much interested in how to implicitly measure these thoughts. Therefore, part of my work focuses on implicit (gender) stereotypes, attitudes, and achievement goals.
Recently, I have also been working on biased risk perceptions (comparative optimism), and will further examine this bias inspecific threat-inducing situations.
----
!!Research interests (keywords)
*Achievement goals and their social value
*Comparative optimism
*Implicit stereotypes and attitudes
*Stereotype threat and performance under pressure
*Women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)
*Working memory capacity
My
*the social group to which one belongs (as in stereotype threat)
*the type of achievement goals one pursues
*the social value of these goals
*and/or individual differences variables, such as working memory capacity (which moderates stereotype threat and choking under pressure effects)
These diverging subjective experiences influence, in turn, cognitive performance.
Because some experiences and thoughts are not always available for introspection, and hence cannot be reported explicitly, I am also very much interested in how to implicitly measure these thoughts. Therefore, part of my work focuses on implicit (gender) stereotypes, attitudes, and achievement goals.
Recently, I have also been working on biased risk perceptions (comparative optimism), and will further examine this bias in
----
!!Research interests (keywords)
*Achievement goals and their social value
*Comparative optimism
*Implicit stereotypes and attitudes
*Stereotype threat and performance under pressure
*Working memory capacity
to:
[[!Research]]
!!Research theme
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% {$ScriptUrl}/../pub/research/interactivism/images/bacterie.jpg
!!!Theoretical developments
Generally speaking, I'm interested in distributed models of life and cognition. In other words, I try to understand and simulate '''how life and cognition may emerge from processes in interaction'''. Main sources of inspiration include the Interactivist framework (''Bickhard''), Piagetian constructivism (''Piaget'') and the Enactive paradigm (''Varela'', ''Thompson'').
My convictions about the emergent and interactive nature of cognition are grounded in scientifically sound theories dealing with far-from-equilibrium systems (''Prigogine'') and the evolution of self-maintaining systems. Obviously, these developments commit to the hypothesis of a deep continuity between the physical world, life and mind. Pages about such transitions '''from general dynamical systems to bacteria to humans''' are available [[A brief history of life|here]].
Working in such a general framework requires finding a '''minimal set of principles necessary to explain phenomena or behaviors''' without dwelling on details specific to a particular situation or species. This is however not contradictory with the fact that each species or each individual subject is unique and that ''beauty'' also ''is in the details''. The goal here is to look for simplicity and avoid simpleness. Principles found again and again at different scales and periods include regulation/modulation or synchronization/anticipation that helped various forms of life to keep being adapted when growing bigger (plants, animals) or when crossing the social divide (multicellular life, insect colonies, societies).
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% {$ScriptUrl}/../pub/common/www.jpg
!!!Computational developments
In practice, after reading papers in diverse fields (such as biology or philosophy), principles and ideas are translated into '''computational models to simulate the dynamics of minimalistic forms of life or sensorimotor agents''' (that cannot seriously be called cognitive with regards to human standards). Although generally working in artificial intelligence or computational neuroscience labs, my research project is thus more likely to be affiliated with the general field of cognitive science. My will is to go back and forth between life sciences and computer science as to enrich and benefit from the different perspectives.
The goals of my research are therefore twofold:
* '''Producing efficient and robust systems''' with applications to robotics and computer science. In this domain, my work focuses on sensorimotor interactions with (or between) humans and robots.
* '''Testing and refining the theory''', as models only reflect the designer ideas and cannot be used as proofs, but can easily refute hypotheses or point to limitations.
The computational models on which I work can be artificially divided in two categories:
* '''[[ElectromechanicalAgency|Minimal agency]]''', where starting from various definitions of agency, I try to understand the conditions and implications of developing artificial agents. I also try to relate the different concepts involved in the definitions with the above-mentioned principles, as to estimate their range of validity. ''Barandiaran et al.'' proposed for instance in 2009 that agents might be characterized by autonomy, interactional asymmetry and normativity, thus going beyond the non regulative autopoiesis (by introducing implicit forms of anticipation and regulation, at least from my perspective).
* '''[[SMInfrastructure|Sensorimotor behaviors]]''', emerging from the interactions of active processes, that locally predict the sensorimotor dynamics (some kind of Piaget's schemas). Each process continuously tries to assimilate some aspects of the current situation and to influence the agent's actions. Learning and forgetting abilities are also required and implemented when dealing with complex and changing environments (whether simulated or real). This leads to an open-ended process where stable closed networks of interactions/predictions may define objects and basic concepts (in the sense of ''O'Regan'').
These models all share the very same principles, although sometimes implemented differently. In any case, the interactions between the many processes defining the system lead to '''two opposite yet complementary phenomena''':
* '''[[Competition]]''', which is required to focus on a stimulus in a rich environment, as well as to take decisions and actions (when different choices/behaviors are possible).
* '''[[Coordination]]''', which is needed as soon as reaching a goal requires going through local extrema (in time), or when various behaviors are simulatenously effective and interdependent (in space).
My initial Master and doctorate theses, as well as my ongoing background research are focused on developing a '''sensorimotor architecture able to account for the flexibility and normativity of behaviors'''. A sketch and the ''up to date'' results of the proposed architecture, also relating it to other proposal and dominent paradigms are presented on the dedicated [[Architecture|architecture]] pages. It has been applied to robust recognition and tracking of rhythms, visual perception in noisy environments as well as dynamic planning and goal reaching.
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% {$ScriptUrl}/../pub/research/interactivism/images/atome.gif
!!!Technical developments
The '''implemented systems are massively parallel, and simulating them on current computer architectures requires some optimization'''. Indeed, the goal here is not to run them as fast as possible since delays can be easily integrated in the predictions, but simply to guarantee real time performance, as it is necessary to interact with the real world.
Optimization can then take two forms:
* '''Hardware''' optimization, adopting for instance a [[GPGPUProcessing|GPGPU]] stance to take advantage of the huge computational power of modern graphics cards. This is very beneficial when dealing with the raw sensory flow and a myriad of similar processes assimilating it (for instance to simulate the cortical visual areas working on the optic flow). However dedicated architectures such as the Cell-BE, FPGAs or even grid computing may better fit the needs when dealing with heterogeneity.
* '''Software''' optimization, as the ideal parallel behavior can be efficiently approximated by carefully designed algorithms. When processes follow a given topology, integration and interpolation of activity can be reduced to nearby elements, the problem with complex and often chaotic systems being to define what ''near'' should mean. In the case of sensorimotor interactions, an adequate metrics is hard to define and we must rely on weaker notions of similarity.
!!Research theme
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% {$ScriptUrl}/../pub/research/interactivism/images/bacterie.jpg
!!!Theoretical developments
Generally speaking, I'm interested in distributed models of life and cognition. In other words, I try to understand and simulate '''how life and cognition may emerge from processes in interaction'''. Main sources of inspiration include the Interactivist framework (''Bickhard''), Piagetian constructivism (''Piaget'') and the Enactive paradigm (''Varela'', ''Thompson'').
My convictions about the emergent and interactive nature of cognition are grounded in scientifically sound theories dealing with far-from-equilibrium systems (''Prigogine'') and the evolution of self-maintaining systems. Obviously, these developments commit to the hypothesis of a deep continuity between the physical world, life and mind. Pages about such transitions '''from general dynamical systems to bacteria to humans''' are available [[A brief history of life|here]].
Working in such a general framework requires finding a '''minimal set of principles necessary to explain phenomena or behaviors''' without dwelling on details specific to a particular situation or species. This is however not contradictory with the fact that each species or each individual subject is unique and that ''beauty'' also ''is in the details''. The goal here is to look for simplicity and avoid simpleness. Principles found again and again at different scales and periods include regulation/modulation or synchronization/anticipation that helped various forms of life to keep being adapted when growing bigger (plants, animals) or when crossing the social divide (multicellular life, insect colonies, societies).
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% {$ScriptUrl}/../pub/common/www.jpg
!!!Computational developments
In practice, after reading papers in diverse fields (such as biology or philosophy), principles and ideas are translated into '''computational models to simulate the dynamics of minimalistic forms of life or sensorimotor agents''' (that cannot seriously be called cognitive with regards to human standards). Although generally working in artificial intelligence or computational neuroscience labs, my research project is thus more likely to be affiliated with the general field of cognitive science. My will is to go back and forth between life sciences and computer science as to enrich and benefit from the different perspectives.
The goals of my research are therefore twofold:
* '''Producing efficient and robust systems''' with applications to robotics and computer science. In this domain, my work focuses on sensorimotor interactions with (or between) humans and robots.
* '''Testing and refining the theory''', as models only reflect the designer ideas and cannot be used as proofs, but can easily refute hypotheses or point to limitations.
The computational models on which I work can be artificially divided in two categories:
* '''[[ElectromechanicalAgency|Minimal agency]]''', where starting from various definitions of agency, I try to understand the conditions and implications of developing artificial agents. I also try to relate the different concepts involved in the definitions with the above-mentioned principles, as to estimate their range of validity. ''Barandiaran et al.'' proposed for instance in 2009 that agents might be characterized by autonomy, interactional asymmetry and normativity, thus going beyond the non regulative autopoiesis (by introducing implicit forms of anticipation and regulation, at least from my perspective).
* '''[[SMInfrastructure|Sensorimotor behaviors]]''', emerging from the interactions of active processes, that locally predict the sensorimotor dynamics (some kind of Piaget's schemas). Each process continuously tries to assimilate some aspects of the current situation and to influence the agent's actions. Learning and forgetting abilities are also required and implemented when dealing with complex and changing environments (whether simulated or real). This leads to an open-ended process where stable closed networks of interactions/predictions may define objects and basic concepts (in the sense of ''O'Regan'').
These models all share the very same principles, although sometimes implemented differently. In any case, the interactions between the many processes defining the system lead to '''two opposite yet complementary phenomena''':
* '''[[Competition]]''', which is required to focus on a stimulus in a rich environment, as well as to take decisions and actions (when different choices/behaviors are possible).
* '''[[Coordination]]''', which is needed as soon as reaching a goal requires going through local extrema (in time), or when various behaviors are simulatenously effective and interdependent (in space).
My initial Master and doctorate theses, as well as my ongoing background research are focused on developing a '''sensorimotor architecture able to account for the flexibility and normativity of behaviors'''. A sketch and the ''up to date'' results of the proposed architecture, also relating it to other proposal and dominent paradigms are presented on the dedicated [[Architecture|architecture]] pages. It has been applied to robust recognition and tracking of rhythms, visual perception in noisy environments as well as dynamic planning and goal reaching.
%lframe lfloat width=100px margin-right=30px margin-bottom=10px margin-top=5px% {$ScriptUrl}/../pub/research/interactivism/images/atome.gif
!!!Technical developments
The '''implemented systems are massively parallel, and simulating them on current computer architectures requires some optimization'''. Indeed, the goal here is not to run them as fast as possible since delays can be easily integrated in the predictions, but simply to guarantee real time performance, as it is necessary to interact with the real world.
Optimization can then take two forms:
* '''Hardware''' optimization, adopting for instance a [[GPGPUProcessing|GPGPU]] stance to take advantage of the huge computational power of modern graphics cards. This is very beneficial when dealing with the raw sensory flow and a myriad of similar processes assimilating it (for instance to simulate the cortical visual areas working on the optic flow). However dedicated architectures such as the Cell-BE, FPGAs or even grid computing may better fit the needs when dealing with heterogeneity.
* '''Software''' optimization, as the ideal parallel behavior can be efficiently approximated by carefully designed algorithms. When processes follow a given topology, integration and interpolation of activity can be reduced to nearby elements, the problem with complex and often chaotic systems being to define what ''near'' should mean. In the case of sensorimotor interactions, an adequate metrics is hard to define and we must rely on weaker notions of similarity.
Changed line 1 from:
[[ResearchFr|French version here]]
to:
[[ResearchFr|(French version here)]]
Changed line 1 from:
[[ResearchFr|FR]]
to:
[[ResearchFr|French version here]]
Changed line 16 from:
!!Research interests (keywords):
to:
!!Research interests (keywords)
Changed lines 1-2 from:
!!Research presentation
to:
!!Social regulation of cognition and implicit social cognition
Changed lines 4-10 from:
* the social group to which one belongs (as in stereotype threat)
* the type of achievement goals one pursues
* and/or individual differences variables, such as working memory capacity (which moderates stereotype threat and choking under pressure effects)
These diverging subjective experiences influence, in turn, cognitive performance.
Because some experiences and thoughts are not always available for introspection, and hence cannot be reported explicitly, I am also very much interested in how to implicitly measure these thoughts. Therefore, part of my work focuses on implicit (gender) stereotypes, attitudes, and achievement goals.
*
*
These diverging subjective experiences influence, in turn, cognitive performance.
Because some experiences and thoughts are not always available for introspection, and hence cannot be reported explicitly
to:
*the social group to which one belongs (as in stereotype threat)
*the type of achievement goals one pursues
*the social value of these goals
*and/or individual differences variables, such as working memory capacity (which moderates stereotype threat and choking under pressure effects)
These diverging subjective experiences influence, in turn, cognitive performance.
Because some experiences and thoughts are not always available for introspection, and hence cannot be reported explicitly, I am also very much interested in how to implicitly measure these thoughts. Therefore, part of my work focuses on implicit (gender) stereotypes, attitudes, and achievement goals.
*the type of achievement goals one pursues
*the social value of these goals
*and/or individual differences variables, such as working memory capacity (which moderates stereotype threat and choking under pressure effects)
These diverging subjective experiences influence, in turn, cognitive performance.
Because some experiences and thoughts are not always available for introspection, and hence cannot be reported explicitly, I am also very much interested in how to implicitly measure these thoughts. Therefore, part of my work focuses on implicit (gender) stereotypes, attitudes, and achievement goals.
Changed lines 18-22 from:
*Stereotype threat and performance under pressure
*Achievement goals
*Working memory capacity
*Women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)
*Implicit stereotypes and attitudes; Comparative optimism
*Achievement goals
*Implicit stereotypes and attitudes; Comparative optimism
to:
*Achievement goals and their social value
*Comparative optimism
*Implicit stereotypes and attitudes
*Stereotype threat and performance under pressure
*Women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)
*Working memory capacity
*Comparative optimism
*Implicit stereotypes and attitudes
*Stereotype threat and performance under pressure
*Women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)
*Working memory capacity
Changed lines 16-17 from:
*Achievement goals; Working memory capacity
to:
*Achievement goals
*Working memory capacity
*Working memory capacity
Changed lines 15-18 from:
Stereotype threat and performance under pressure; Achievement goals; Working memory capacity; Women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics); Implicit stereotypes and attitudes; Comparative optimism
to:
*Stereotype threat and performance under pressure
*Achievement goals; Working memory capacity
*Women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)
*Implicit stereotypes and attitudes; Comparative optimism
*Achievement goals; Working memory capacity
*Women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)
*Implicit stereotypes and attitudes; Comparative optimism
Changed lines 1-30 from:
->Visual Servoing
->Topological navigation using sensory memory
->Multi-Sensor Based Control
->Force-Vision Coupling
->Second order visual servoing
->Robots (Manipulator, Mobile, Aerial)
*'''AGV''' - Autonomous Guided Vehicle (Leader: [[Profiles/ThuilotB|+]])
->Robot
->Enhanced Mobility (Sliding and Slipping) and Uncertain Dynamics
->Hybrid control architecture and monitoring
->Obstacle avoidance
->Robots (Mobile, AGV, All Terrain vehicles, Agricultural Vehicles, Platoon, Multi-Robot System)
*'''MICMAC''' - Modelisation, Identification and Control of complex MAChines (Leader: [[Profiles/MartinetP|+]])
->Kinematic Identification and Dynamic Identification
->High Dynamic Modeling and Control
->Vision based Control of Parallel Robot
->Multi Arms control and Humanoid robot control
->Redundancy and polymorphism
->Robots (Parallel Robot, High Speed Machine Tools
Additional details on our work on these topics can be found by following the links on the left sidebar.
to:
My research adopts a person by situation perspective to examine cognitive performance. The broad idea is that high-stakes testing situations are differently experienced depending on:
* the social group to which one belongs (as in stereotype threat)
* the type of achievement goals one pursues
* and/or individual differences variables, such as working memory capacity (which moderates stereotype threat and choking under pressure effects)
These diverging subjective experiences influence, in turn, cognitive performance.
Because some experiences and thoughts are not always available for introspection, and hence cannot be reported explicitly, I am also very much interested in how to implicitly measure these thoughts. Therefore, part of my work focuses on implicit (gender) stereotypes, attitudes, and achievement goals.
Recently, I have also been working on biased risk perceptions (comparative optimism), and will further examine this bias in specific threat-inducing situations.
!!Research interests (keywords):
Stereotype threat and performance under pressure; Achievement goals; Working memory capacity; Women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics); Implicit stereotypes and attitudes; Comparative optimism
* the social group to which one belongs (as in stereotype threat)
* the type of achievement goals one pursues
* and/or individual differences variables, such as working memory capacity (which moderates stereotype threat and choking under pressure effects)
These diverging subjective experiences influence, in turn, cognitive performance.
Because some experiences and thoughts are not always available for introspection, and hence cannot be reported explicitly, I am also very much interested in how to implicitly measure these thoughts. Therefore, part of my work focuses on implicit (gender) stereotypes, attitudes, and achievement goals.
Recently, I have also been working on biased risk perceptions (comparative optimism), and will further examine this bias in specific threat-inducing situations.
!!Research interests (keywords):
Stereotype threat and performance under pressure; Achievement goals; Working memory capacity; Women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics); Implicit stereotypes and attitudes; Comparative optimism
Changed lines 30-31 from:
Additional details on our work on these topics can be found on the following pages:
(:pagelist link=Category.Topic:)
(:pagelist link=Category
to:
Additional details on our work on these topics can be found by following the links on the left sidebar.
Added lines 28-31:
----
Additional details on our work on these topics can be found on the following pages:
(:pagelist link=Category.Topic:)
Added lines 1-27:
The Team ROSACE (Robotic and Autonomous Complex Systems) is led by Philippe Martinet and Youcef Mezouar. The main research axes are:
*'''VISIR''' - Visual ServoIng of Robots (Leader: [[Profiles/MezouarY|+]])
->Visual Servoing (Position, Image and Hybrid Based, Omnidirectional)
->Topological navigation using sensory memory
->Multi-Sensor Based Control
->Force-Vision Coupling
->Second order visual servoing
->Robots (Manipulator, Mobile, Aerial)
*'''AGV''' - Autonomous Guided Vehicle (Leader: [[Profiles/ThuilotB|+]])
->Robot and multi-robot Control (Non Linear, Adaptive, Predictive, Robust)
->Enhanced Mobility (Sliding and Slipping) and Uncertain Dynamics
->Hybrid control architecture and monitoring
->Obstacle avoidance
->Robots (Mobile, AGV, All Terrain vehicles, Agricultural Vehicles, Platoon, Multi-Robot System)
*'''MICMAC''' - Modelisation, Identification and Control of complex MAChines (Leader: [[Profiles/MartinetP|+]])
->Kinematic Identification and Dynamic Identification
->High Dynamic Modeling and Control
->Vision based Control of Parallel Robot
->Multi Arms control and Humanoid robot control
->Redundancy and polymorphism
->Robots (Parallel Robot, High Speed Machine Tools, Humanoid robots, Service Robots, Polymorph Robots)
*'''VISIR''' - Visual ServoIng of Robots (Leader: [[Profiles/MezouarY|+]])
->Visual Servoing (Position, Image and Hybrid Based, Omnidirectional)
->Topological navigation using sensory memory
->Multi-Sensor Based Control
->Force-Vision Coupling
->Second order visual servoing
->Robots (Manipulator, Mobile, Aerial)
*'''AGV''' - Autonomous Guided Vehicle (Leader: [[Profiles/ThuilotB|+]])
->Robot and multi-robot Control (Non Linear, Adaptive, Predictive, Robust)
->Enhanced Mobility (Sliding and Slipping) and Uncertain Dynamics
->Hybrid control architecture and monitoring
->Obstacle avoidance
->Robots (Mobile, AGV, All Terrain vehicles, Agricultural Vehicles, Platoon, Multi-Robot System)
*'''MICMAC''' - Modelisation, Identification and Control of complex MAChines (Leader: [[Profiles/MartinetP|+]])
->Kinematic Identification and Dynamic Identification
->High Dynamic Modeling and Control
->Vision based Control of Parallel Robot
->Multi Arms control and Humanoid robot control
->Redundancy and polymorphism
->Robots (Parallel Robot, High Speed Machine Tools, Humanoid robots, Service Robots, Polymorph Robots)