Many attempts have been made to build an artificial brain. This paper aims to contribute to the conceptualization of an artificial learning system that functionally resembles an organic brain in a number of important neuropsychological aspects. Probably the techniques (algorithms) required are already available in various fields of artificial intelligence. However, the question is how to combine those techniques. The combination of truly autonomous learning, in which "accidental" findings (serendipity) can be used without supervision, with supervised learning from both the surrounding and previous knowledge, is still very challenging. In the event of changed circumstances, network models that can not utilize previously acquired knowledge must be completely reset, while in representation-driven networks, new formation will remain outside the scope, as we will argue. In this paper considerations to make artificial learning functionally similar to organic learning, and the type of algorithm that is necessary in the different hierarchical layers of the brain are discussed. To this end, algorithms are divided into two types: conditional algorithms (CA) and completely unsupervised learning. It is argued that in a conceptualisation of an artificial device that is functional similar to an organic learning system, both conditional learning (by applying CA’s), and non-conditional (supervised) learning must be applied.
MULTIFILE
Introduction: Self-regulated learning (SRL) has traditionally been associated with study success in higher education. In contrast, study success is still rarely associated with executive functions (EF), while it is known from neuropsychological practice that EF can influence overall functioning and performance. However some studies have shown relationships between EF and study success, but this has mainly been investigated in school children and adolescents. EF refer to higher-order cognitive processes to regulate cognition, behavior, and emotion in service of adaptive and goal-directed behaviors. SRL is a dynamic process in which learners activate and maintain cognitions, affects, and behaviors to achieve personal learning goals. This study explores the added value of including EF and SRL to predict study success (i.e., the obtained credits). Methods: In this study, we collected data from 315 first-year psychology students of a University of Applied Sciences in the Netherlands who completed questionnaires related to both EF (BRIEF) and SRL (MSLQ) two months after the start of the academic year. Credit points were obtained at the end of that first academic year. We used Structural Equation Modeling to test whether EF and SRL together explain more variance in study success than either concept alone. Results: EF explains 19.8% of the variance, SRL 22.9%, and in line with our hypothesis, EF and SRL combined explain 39.8% of the variance in obtained credits. Discussion: These results indicate that focusing on EF and SRL could lead to a better understanding of how higher education students learn successfully. This might be the objective of further investigation.
MULTIFILE
Introduction: Self-regulated learning (SRL) has traditionally been associated with study success in higher education. In contrast, study success is still rarely associated with executive functions (EF), while it is known from neuropsychological practice that EF can influence overall functioning and performance. However some studies have shown relationships between EF and study success, but this has mainly been investigated in school children and adolescents. EF refer to higher-order cognitive processes to regulate cognition, behavior, and emotion in service of adaptive and goal-directed behaviors. SRL is a dynamic process in which learners activate and maintain cognitions, affects, and behaviors to achieve personal learning goals. This study explores the added value of including EF and SRL to predict study success (i.e., the obtained credits). Methods: In this study, we collected data from 315 first-year psychology students of a University of Applied Sciences in the Netherlands who completed questionnaires related to both EF (BRIEF) and SRL (MSLQ) two months after the start of the academic year. Credit points were obtained at the end of that first academic year. We used Structural Equation Modeling to test whether EF and SRL together explain more variance in study success than either concept alone. Results: EF explains 19.8% of the variance, SRL 22.9%, and in line with our hypothesis, EF and SRL combined explain 39.8% of the variance in obtained credits. Discussion: These results indicate that focusing on EF and SRL could lead to a better understanding of how higher education students learn successfully. This might be the objective of further investigation.
MULTIFILE
