Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32089113›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2020

Network architectures supporting learnability.

Perry Zurn, Danielle S Bassett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The growth and form of knowledge networks by kinesthetic curiosity.Current opinion in behavioral sciences · 2020
    Article
  7. Architecture and evolution of semantic networks in mathematics texts.Proceedings. Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2020
    Article
  8. Unifying the essential concepts of biological networks: biological insights and philosophical foundations.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    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

2 authors.

Perry ZurnDepartment of Philosophy, American University, Washington, DC 20016, USA.
Danielle S BassettDepartment of Bioengineering, School of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human learners acquire complex interconnected networks of relational knowledge. The capacity for such learning naturally depends on two factors: the architecture (or informational structure) of the knowledge network itself and the architecture of the computational unit-the brain-that encodes and processes the information. That is, learning is reliant on integrated network architectures at two levels: the epistemic and the computational, or the conceptual and the neural. Motivated by a wish to understand conventional human knowledge, here, we discuss emerging work assessing network constraints on the learnability of relational knowledge, and theories from statistical physics that instantiate the principles of thermodynamics and information theory to offer an explanatory model for such constraints. We then highlight similarities between those constraints on the learnability of relational networks, at one level, and the physical constraints on the development of interconnected patterns in neural systems, at another level, both leading to hierarchically modular networks. To support our discussion of these similarities, we employ an operational distinction between the modeller (e.g. the human brain), the model (e.g. a single human's knowledge) and the modelled (e.g. the information present in our experiences). We then turn to a philosophical discussion of whether and how we can extend our observations to a claim regarding explanation and mechanism for knowledge acquisition. What relation between hierarchical networks, at the conceptual and neural levels, best facilitate learning? Are the architectures of optimally learnable networks a topological reflection of the architectures of comparably developed neural networks? Finally, we contribute to a unified approach to hierarchies and levels in biological networks by proposing several epistemological norms for analysing the computational brain and social epistemes, and for developing pedagogical principles conducive to curious thought. This article is part of the theme issue 'Unifying the essential concepts of biological networks: biological insights and philosophical foundations'.

Indexed as

KnowledgeLearningNerve NetPhysicsThermodynamicscollective dynamicsconstraintscuriosityknowledge networksnetwork neuroscience

Identifiers

PMID32089113
PMCPMC7061954

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.