Which coordinate system for modelling path integration?

DOI10.1016/J.JTBI.2009.11.021zbMATH Open1406.92729arXiv1204.6189OpenAlexW2056128573WikidataQ37644784 ScholiaQ37644784MaRDI QIDQ1715319FDOQ1715319

Robert J. Vickerstaff, Allen Cheung

Publication date: 4 February 2019

Published in: Journal of Theoretical Biology (Search for Journal in Brave)

Abstract: Path integration is a navigation strategy widely observed in nature where an animal maintains a running estimate of its location during an excursion. Evidence suggests it is both ancient and ubiquitous in nature. Over the past century or so, canonical and neural network models have flourished, based on a wide range of assumptions, justifications and supporting data. Despite the importance of the phenomenon, consensus and unifying principles appear lacking. A fundamental issue is the neural representation of space needed for biological path integration. This paper presents a scheme to classify path integration systems on the basis of the way the home vector records and updates the spatial relationship between the animal and its home location. Four extended classes of coordinate systems are used to unify and review both canonical and neural network models of path integration, from the arthropod and mammalian literature. This scheme demonstrates analytical equivalence between models which may otherwise appear unrelated, and distinguishes between models which may superficially appear similar. A thorough analysis is carried out of the equational forms of important facets of path integration including updating, steering, searching and systematic errors, using each of the four coordinate systems. The type of available directional cue, namely allothetic or idiothetic, is also considered. It is shown that on balance, the class of home vectors which includes the geocentric Cartesian coordinate system, appears to be the most robust for biological systems. A key conclusion is that deducing computational structure from behavioural data alone will be difficult or impossible, at least in the absence of an analysis of random errors. Consequently it is likely that further theoretical insights into path integration will require an in-depth study of the effect of noise on the four classes of home vectors.

Full work available at URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1204.6189

Recommendations

• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 6966932
• Path integration in conical space
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3941846
• scientific article
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 4067282
• Path integration -- a network model
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3960593
• Basic differential models for coordinate generation
• Modelling of the space of paths in problems of constructing optimal trajectories
• Which models for collocated cokriging?

zbMATH Keywords

navigationallotheticegocentricgeocentricidiothetic

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Learning and adaptive systems in artificial intelligence (68T05) Animal behavior (92D50)

Cites Work

• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Egocentric path integration models and their application to desert arthropods
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• The ant's path integration system: a neural architecture
• Animal navigation: the difficulty of moving in a straight line
• Animal navigation: General properties of directed walks
• Path integration -- a network model

Cited In (3)

• Sensory and update errors which can affect path integration
• Path integration mediated systematic search: a Bayesian model
• Animal path integration: a model of positional uncertainty along tortuous paths

This page was built for publication: Which coordinate system for modelling path integration?

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q1715319)