Generalizing the dynamic field theory of spatial cognition across real and developmental time scales

Within cognitive neuroscience, computational models are designed to provide insights into the organization of behavior while adhering to neural principles. These models should provide sufficient specificity to generate novel predictions while maintaining the generality needed to capture behavior across tasks and/or time scales. This paper presents one such model, the Dynamic Field Theory (DFT) of spatial cognition, showing new simulations that provide a demonstration proof that the theory generalizes across developmental changes in performance in four tasks—the Piagetian A-not-B task, a sandbox version of the A-not-B task, a canonical spatial recall task, and a position discrimination task. Model simulations demonstrate that the DFT can accomplish both specificity—generating novel, testable predictions—and generality—spanning multiple tasks across development with a relatively simple developmental hypothesis. Critically, the DFT achieves generality across tasks and time scales with no modification to its basic structure and with a strong commitment to neural principles. The only change necessary to capture development in the model was an increase in the precision of the tuning of receptive fields as well as an increase in the precision of local excitatory interactions among neurons in the model. These small quantitative changes were sufficient to move the model through a set of quantitative and qualitative behavioral changes that span the age range from 8 months to 6 years and into adulthood. We conclude by considering how the DFT is positioned in the literature, the challenges on the horizon for our framework, and how a dynamic field approach can yield new insights into development from a computational cognitive neuroscience perspective.

Seasonality of tuberculosis in India: is it real and what does it tell us?

India has a third of the world’s tuberculosis cases. Large-scale expansion of a national program in 1998 has allowed for population-based analyses of data from tuberculosis registries. We assessed seasonal trends using quarterly reports from districts with stable tuberculosis control programs (population 115 million). In northern India, tuberculosis diagnoses peaked between April and June, and reached a nadir between October and December, whereas no seasonality was reported in the south. Overall, rates of new smear-positive tuberculosis cases were 57 per 100 000 population in peak seasons versus 46 per 100 000 in trough seasons. General health-seeking behavior artifact was ruled out. Seasonality was highest in paediatric cases, suggesting variation in recent transmission.

Time series analysis of jaw muscle contraction and tissue deformation during mastication in miniature pigs

Masticatory muscle contraction causes both jaw movement and tissue deformation during function. Natural chewing data from 25 adult miniature pigs were studied by means of time series analysis. The data set included simultaneous recordings of electromyography (EMG) from bilateral masseter (MA), zygomaticomandibularis (ZM) and lateral pterygoid muscles, bone surface strains from the left squamosal bone (SQ), condylar neck (CD) and mandibular corpus (MD), and linear deformation of the capsule of the jaw joint measured bilaterally using differential variable reluctance transducers. Pairwise comparisons were examined by calculating the cross-correlation functions. Jaw-adductor muscle activity of MA and ZM was found to be highly cross-correlated with CD and SQ strains and weakly with MD strain. No muscle’s activity was strongly linked to capsular deformation of the jaw joint, nor were bone strains and capsular deformation tightly linked. Homologous muscle pairs showed the greatest synchronization of signals, but the signals themselves were not significantly more correlated than those of non-homologous muscle pairs. These results suggested that bone strains and capsular deformation are driven by different mechanical regimes. Muscle contraction and ensuing reaction forces are probably responsible for bone strains, whereas capsular deformation is more likely a product of movement.