ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2018
A review of abstract concept learning in embodied agents and robots.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mutual human-robot understanding for a robot-enhanced society: the crucial development of shared embodied cognition.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Review
- Neurobiological mechanisms for language, symbols and concepts: Clues from brain-constrained deep neural networks.Progress in neurobiology · 2023Review
- Editorial concepts in interaction: social engagement and inner experiences.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Article
- What the study of spinal cord injured patients can tell us about the significance of the body in cognition.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2022Review
- Modelling concrete and abstract concepts using brain-constrained deep neural networks.Psychological research · 2022Article
- Embodying Language through Gestures: Residuals of Motor Memories Modulate Motor Cortex Excitability during Abstract Words Comprehension.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Automatic system for high-throughput and high-sensitivity diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2.Bioprocess and biosystems engineering · 2022Article
- Ultimate Grounding of Abstract Concepts: A Graded Account.Journal of cognition · 2022Article
- Learning Actions From Natural Language Instructions Using an ON-World Embodied Cognitive Architecture.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2021Article
- A Database for Learning Numbers by Visual Finger Recognition in Developmental Neuro-Robotics.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2021Article
- Spatial Concept Learning: A Spiking Neural Network Implementation in Virtual and Physical Robots.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2019Article
- Varieties of abstract concepts: development, use and representation in the brain.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper reviews computational modelling approaches to the learning of abstract concepts and words in embodied agents such as humanoid robots. This will include a discussion of the learning of abstract words such as 'use' and 'make' in humanoid robot experiments, and the acquisition of numerical concepts via gesture and finger counting strategies. The current approaches share a strong emphasis on embodied cognition aspects for the grounding of abstract concepts, and a continuum, rather than dichotomy, view of concrete/abstract concepts differences.This article is part of the theme issue 'Varieties of abstract concepts: development, use and representation in the brain'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.