↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Overlapping Structures in Sensory-Motor Mappings

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Overlapping Structures in Sensory-Motor Mappings
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0084240
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kevin Earland, Mark Lee, Patricia Shaw, James Law

Abstract

This paper examines a biologically-inspired representation technique designed for the support of sensory-motor learning in developmental robotics. An interesting feature of the many topographic neural sheets in the brain is that closely packed receptive fields must overlap in order to fully cover a spatial region. This raises interesting scientific questions with engineering implications: e.g. is overlap detrimental? does it have any benefits? This paper examines the effects and properties of overlap between elements arranged in arrays or maps. In particular we investigate how overlap affects the representation and transmission of spatial location information on and between topographic maps. Through a series of experiments we determine the conditions under which overlap offers advantages and identify useful ranges of overlap for building mappings in cognitive robotic systems. Our motivation is to understand the phenomena of overlap in order to provide guidance for application in sensory-motor learning robots.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 5%
France 1 5%
Germany 1 5%
Unknown 17 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 20%
Researcher 4 20%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 2 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 4 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 15%
Neuroscience 3 15%
Social Sciences 2 10%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 2 10%