[ACT-R-users] ACT-R influencing neuroscience?

[Christian Lebiere]

Bonnie,

I don't know if that quite qualifies as an "explicit influence of ACT-R
modeling on mainstream neuroscience research", but in this paper
(http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/921695) we used ACT-R models as prototypes
for neural (spec. Leabra) models of complex sensemaking tasks (see section
3.2 in particular):

Christian Lebiere, Peter Pirolli, Robert Thomson, et al., ³A Functional
Model of Sensemaking in a Neurocognitive Architecture,² Computational
Intelligence and Neuroscience, vol. 2013, Article ID 921695, 29 pages, 2013.
doi:10.1155/2013/921695

Neural models used ACT-R models as modeling templates (adopting the same
knowledge representation and procedures), explicit teachers (using model
output to train the neural model) and human oracles (using model output to
evaluate the output of the neural model when human data was unavailable).

Christian


On 5/29/14 11:03 AM, "Bonnie E John" <bejohn at us.ibm.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> HI folks,
> I know that there is lots of ACT-R research using fMRI to map the operation
> of ACT-R to brain functions, but has there been any explicit influence of
> ACT-R modeling on mainstream neuroscience research?
> That is, have any researchers who's main or original focus used
> neuroscience techniques who said "Hey, ACT-R predicts X -- how would it
> change my own theories if it were true?  Let me go test it."
> I looked at the Pubs page, but nothing "popped" out as answering this
> question to my ignorant-of-neuroscience eyes.
> Thanks,
> Bonnie
> _______________________________________________
> ACT-R-users mailing list
> ACT-R-users at act-r.psy.cmu.edu
> https://mailman.srv.cs.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/act-r-users