Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29375355›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in computational neuroscience2017

Computational Foundations of Natural Intelligence.

Marcel van Gerven

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A self-learning magnetic Hopfield neural network with intrinsic gradient descent adaption.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Eight challenges in developing theory of intelligence.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. The neuroconnectionist research programme.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2023
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Encoder-Decoder Full Residual Deep Networks for Robust Regression and Spatiotemporal Estimation.IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Will We Ever Have Conscious Machines?Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Marcel van GervenComputational Cognitive Neuroscience Lab, Department of Artificial Intelligence, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

New developments in AI and neuroscience are revitalizing the quest to understanding natural intelligence, offering insight about how to equip machines with human-like capabilities. This paper reviews some of the computational principles relevant for understanding natural intelligence and, ultimately, achieving strong AI. After reviewing basic principles, a variety of computational modeling approaches is discussed. Subsequently, I concentrate on the use of artificial neural networks as a framework for modeling cognitive processes. This paper ends by outlining some of the challenges that remain to fulfill the promise of machines that show human-like intelligence.

Indexed as

artificial neural networkscognitionmachine learningnatural intelligencestrong AI

Identifiers

PMID29375355
PMCPMC5770642

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.