Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T12:00:35.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Design of Automata and the Interpretation of Cerebral Behavior

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Stanley Frankel
Stanley Frankel*
Affiliation:
California Institute of Technology
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In principle it is possible to design automata to display any explicitly described behavior. The McCulloch-Pitts “neuron” is a convenient elementary component for the control mechanisms of automata. Previously described techniques permit the design of an automaton which would arbitrarily well simulate human behavior. The difficulty of producing such a design lies primarily in formulating an explicit description of the required behavior. The control mechanism of such an automaton would be of very great logical complexity. Its mode of operation probably would not resemble that of a human brain. The brain is more plausibly represented by stochastic models as proposed by Hebb. Such models can more easily be designed or understood by reason of lesser logical complexity. A method of computational investigation of the functioning of such stochastic models is described. Several extremely simple models have been investigated. One is shown to have properties suggestive of learning ability.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , June 1955 , pp. 149 - 162
Copyright
Copyright © 1955 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The author is indebted to many friends for helpful discussion and criticism, particularly to Miss Winifred Whitfield and Dr. John von Neumann.

References

Babbage, H. P. Babbage's calculating engines, London: E. and F. N. Spon., 1889Google Scholar
Chapuis, A. Les automates Editions du Griffon, Neuchatel: Edmond Droz, 1949Google Scholar
Culbertson, J. T. Consciousness and behavior, Dubuque: W. C. Brown Co., 1950Google Scholar
Frankel, S. Proposed neural network investigation. Dig. Comp. Gr., Calif. Inst. Tech., 1949.Google Scholar
Hebb, D. O. The organization of behavior, New York: Wiley, 1949Google Scholar
Jefferson, G. The mind of mechanical man. Brit. med. J., 1949, 1, 1105–1105CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jeffress, L. A. Cerebral mechanisms in behavior, New York: Wiley, 1951Google Scholar
McCulloch, W. W. and Pitts, W.. A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. Bul. math. Biophysics, 1943, 5, 115–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monte Carlo method. Nat. Bur. appl. math. Ser., No. 12, 1951.Google Scholar
Nielsen, J. M. Agnosia, apraxia, aphasia, New York: Paul B. Hoeber, 1946Google Scholar
Northrop, F. S. C. The neurological and behavioristic psychological basis of the ordering of society by means of ideas. Science, 1948, 107, 411–417CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spuhler, J. N. On the number of genes in man. Science, 1948, 108, 279–280CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turing, A. M. On computable numbers, with application to the entscheidungsproblem. London math. soc. Proc., 1936, 42(2), 230–265Google Scholar
Turing, A. M. Computing machines and intelligence. Mind (Oct. 1950).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Von Neumann, J. Probabilistic logics. (Notes R. S. Pierce) Dept. of Math., Calif. Inst. Tech., 1952.Google Scholar
Walter, W. G. An imitation of life. Sci. Am., 1950, 182, 42–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiener, N. Cybernetics (pp. 173–173). Cambridge, Mass.: Technology Press, 1948Google ScholarPubMed
Wilson, R. R. Monte Carlo calculation of showers in lead. (Abs.). Phys. Rev., 1950, 79, 204–204Google Scholar