Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attachedcopy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial researchand education use, including for instruction at the authors institutionand sharing with colleagues.Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling orlicensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third partywebsites are prohibited.In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of thearticle (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website orinstitutional repository. Authors requiring further informationregarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies areencouraged to visit:http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 
Author's personal copy
Network properties of a model for conscious and unconsciousmental processes
$
Roseli S. Wedemann
a,
Ã
, Luı´s Alfredo Vidal de Carvalho
b
, Raul Donangelo
c
a
Instituto de Matema´tica e Estatı´stica, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, R. Sa˜o Francisco Xavier, 524, 20550-013 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
b
Programa de Eng. Sistemas e Computac 
 -
a˜o - COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Caixa Postal 68511, 21945-970 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
c
Instituto de Fı´sica, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Caixa Postal 68528, 21941-972 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
a r t i c l e i n f o
Available online 15 July 2008
Keywords:
Consciousness and unconsciousnessNeurosesHierarchical memorySelf-organized learningComplex neural network properties
a b s t r a c t
We have previously described the mental pathology known as neurosis, in terms of its relation tomemory function. We proposed neural network mechanisms, whereby neurotic behavior is described asa brain associative memory process, and the symbolic associativity involved in psychoanalytic
working-through
can be mapped onto a corresponding network reconfiguration process. Microscopicmechanisms that control synaptic properties self-organize the memory networks to a hierarchical,clustered structure. Modules corresponding to sensorial and symbolic memories interact, representingunconscious and conscious mental processes. Here, we review these concepts and illustrate, withsimulations, some of these complex networks’ behaviors and properties.
&
2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Although inconclusive, psychodynamic theories[7,9,10,17]seem to suggest correlations between creativity, associativity,psychopathology and the unconscious. We explored these com-monalities and proposed, in a previous paper[22], a schematicmodel for some concepts related with neurotic mental processes,as described by Freud[7,9,10]. Our description is based on thecurrent view that the brain is a cognitive system composed of neurons, interconnected by a network of synapses, that cooperateamong themselves to process information in a distributed fashion.Mental states are thus the result of the global cooperation of thebrain’s distributed neural activity[5,13,14]. The emergence of aglobal state of the brain’s neural network generates a bodilyresponse, which we call an
act 
.Psychoanalytic research regarding the
transference neuroses
hasfound that traumatic and repressed memories are knowledgewhich is present in the subject, but which is symbolicallyinaccessible to him. It is therefore considered
unconscious
knowl-edge[7,9]. Freud observed that neurotic patients systematicallyrepeated symptoms in the form of ideas and impulses, and calledthis tendency a
compulsion to repeat 
[10]. He related thecompulsion to repeat to repressed or traumatic memory traces,caused by a mental conflict[9]. Neurotic analysands have beenable to obtain relief and cure of painful symptoms through amechanism called
working-through
. This procedure aims atdeveloping knowledge regarding the causes of symptoms byaccessing unconscious memories, and understanding and chan-ging the analysand’s compulsion to repeat[10]. The techniqueinvolves mainly free associative talking during analytic sessionsand interpretation of dreams, among other processes.In[22], memory was modeled by a Boltzmann machine (BM)represented by a complete graph. It is known, however, that brainneuronal topology is selectively structured. Neurons interactmainly with spatially close neighbors, having fewer long-rangesynaptic connections to more distant neighbors[5,12,14]. Wefurther developed the memory model by including some knownmicroscopic mechanisms that control synaptic properties, so thatthe network self-organizes to a hierarchical, clustered structure.We propose an organization, where two hierarchically structuredmodules corresponding to sensorial and symbolic memoriesinteract, producing sensorial and symbolic activity, representingunconscious and conscious mental processes. In proposing thisorganization, we followed Freud’s idea that unconscious mem-ories are those which we cannot access symbolically, i.e. cannottalk about[7–10]. In this paper, we represent brain mechanismsinvolved in neurosis as a complex system, and analyze themaccording to recent methods developed for the study of complexnetworks.A review of recent developments in the scientific under-standing of consciousness, as well as a model for attention as abasic function related to conscious activity may be found in[18].Kinsbourne[15]discusses how Freud’s attempt at proposing aneural substrate for mental processes[8]can be viewed in light of modern developments in neuroscience, such as the understanding
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Contents lists available atScienceDirectjournal homepage:www.elsevier.com/locate/neucom
Neurocomputing
0925-2312/$-see front matter
&
2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2008.02.023
$
This research was developed with grants from the Brazilian National ResearchCouncil (CNPq), the Rio de Janeiro State Research Foundation (FAPERJ) and theBrazilian agency which funds graduate studies (CAPES).
Ã
Corresponding author. Tel.: +552122382180; fax: +552125877212.
E-mail addresses:
roseli@ime.uerj.br (R.S. Wedemann),LuisAlfredo@ufrj.br(L.A.V. de Carvalho),donangel@if.ufrj.br (R. Donangelo). Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 3367–3371
 
Author's personal copy
of forebrain functioning. Aleksander and Morton review theirAxiomatic Consciousness Theory (ACT) in[1], which addressesphenomenology in neuroscience (relating symbolic representa-tion to subjective experience), and apply it to modeling of visualphenomenology. The Global Workspace Theory[2]is based on thecomputational science concept of global workspace, wherematerial needed to be worked on by a number of processors isheld, and gives an useful view on certain aspects of consciousness.Our main contribution with respect to current work regardingmachine models of consciousness is to propose a neuronalmechanism that describes conscious and unconscious memoryactivity involved in neurosis. The unconscious compulsion torepeat is explained as a neural network associative memorymechanism, where an input stimulus of any kind associates to apattern in sensorial memory, which cannot activate symbolicbrain processing areas. Neurotic (unconscious) acts are isolatedfrom symbolic representation and association (similar to reflexes).We illustrate by our network model, how Freud’s ideas regardingthe unconscious show that symbolic processing, language andmeaning are essential for consciousness.We first review our model for neurosis[22]and the algorithmfor generating hierarchically clustered memory modules[20]. Wethen present new simulation results and model analysis, withsome important properties of these complex networks. Finally, wedraw conclusions and perspectives for future work.
2. Functional and computational model for the neuroses
We review the model described in previous work[22], where weproposed that the neuroses manifest themselves as an associativememory process, a mechanism where the network returns a storedpattern, when it is shown another input pattern similar to the storedone[13]. We modeled the compulsion to repeat neurotic symptoms,by supposing that such a symptom is acted, when the subject ispresented with a stimulus, which resembles a repressed ortraumatic (unconscious) memory trace. The stimulus causes astabilization of the neural net onto a minimal energy state,corresponding to the memory trace that synthesizes the originalrepressed experience, which in turn generates a neurotic response(an act). The neurotic act is not a result of the stimulus as a newsituation but a response to the repressed memory.We mapped the linguistic, symbolic associative processinvolved in psychoanalytic working-through into a correspondingprocess of reinforcing synapses among memory traces in thebrain. These connections should involve symbolic memory,leading to at least partial transformation of repressed memoryto consciousness. This has a relation to the importance of language in psychoanalysis and the idea that unconsciousmemories are those that cannot be expressed symbolically. Wepropose that as the analysand symbolically elaborates manifesta-tions of unconscious material through transference in psycho-analytic sessions, he is reconfiguring the topology of his neuralnet, by creating new connections and reinforcing or inhibitingolder ones. The network topology which results from thisreconfiguration will stabilize onto new energy minima, associatedwith new acts. The process of slowly and repeatedly reconfiguringsynaptic connections to elaborate knowledge accounts for thelong durations of psychoanalytic processes, where repetition isspecially important.Memory functioning is modeled by a BM with
N 
neurons,where node states take binary values. Pattern retrieval on the netis achieved by a standard simulated annealing process, in whichthe network temperature
T 
is gradually lowered by a factor
a
. Werefer the reader to Ref.[13]for a description of the BM algorithmand its properties.
3. Self-organizing hierarchical memory structures
As a first approximation[22], we modeled memory by a BMrepresented by a complete graph. In a further refinement, we nowconsider that neurons belong to two different subsets, corre-sponding to
sensorial
and
symbolic 
memories. Memory tracesstored in sensorial memory represent mental images of stimulireceived by sensory receptors (located in eyes, ears, skin and otherparts of the body) from the environment and the body itself. Thisincludes information regarding affects and emotion. Sensorialmemory represents brain structures such as the amygdala,cerebellum, reflex pathways, hippocampus, and prefrontal, limbicand parieto-occipital-temporal cortices, which synthesize visual,auditory and somatic information. Symbolic memory storesrepresentations of traces in sensorial memory, i.e.
symbols
, andrefers to another level of representation. It represents brainstructures such as areas of the medial temporal lobe, thehippocampus, Wernicke’s and Broca’s areas and other areas of the frontal cortex. These latter areas are associated with languageand, because of them, we can associate a word such as ‘‘red’’ tothesensation of seeing a red object. Attentional mechanisms[18],which we did not model, select stimuli to sensorial memory andallow them to become conscious, if associated to a symbolicmemory trace. Sensorial stimuli which cannot associate tosymbolic memory remains unconscious[7,9,14]. We refer to thesubset of memory traces in sensorial memory which can associateto a symbol as the ‘‘conscious’’ subset. Freud called this the
systemconscious
and defines it as the set of psychical information whichis capable of becoming conscious (in some of his works he refersto this set as the preconscious)[7,9].The neurotic compulsion to repeat[9,10]is explained here as abodily response (an act) to an access to sensorial memory, whichdoes not activate symbolic memory, as in a reflex. This accountsfor the fact that neurotics say they cannot explain their neuroticacts, such as in ‘‘I don’t know why I was so upset and overreactedwith Mary’’. When a stimulus
S 
0
which causes the retrieval of asensorial memory trace can activate also a pattern in symbolicmemory, it can become conscious, the output is not as in reflexivebehavior and there is another level of processing. This mechanismis similar to ideas proposed by Edelman[5]and strongly reflectsFreud’s concepts of conscious and unconscious mental processesand the role of language in psychoanalysis[9,10].In order to model the organization of the topology of eachmemory, we consider the following microscopic biologicalmechanisms. Brain cells in many animals have a structure called
on-center/off-surround
, in which a neuron is in cooperation,through excitatory synapses, with other neurons in its immediateneighborhood, whereas it is in competition with neurons that layoutside these surroundings. These mechanisms are found stati-cally hardwired, and also as part of dynamical processes, whereneurons compete for certain chemicals[12,14]. In synaptogenesis,for example, substances generically called neural growth factorsare released by stimulated neurons and, spreading throughdiffusion, reach neighboring cells, promoting synaptic growth.Cells that receive neural growth factors make synapses and live,while cells that have no contact with these substances die[14].A neuron releasing neural growth factor guides the synapticformation in its tri-dimensional neighborhood, becoming a centerof synaptic convergence. When neighboring neurons releasedifferent neural growth factors in different amounts, manysynaptic convergence centers are generated and a competition isestablished between them, through the surrounding synapses. Asignaling network triggered by environmental stimulation isestablished, which controls development and plasticity of neuro-nal circuits, and this suggests an idea of the way environmentrepresents itself in the brain. We thus developed the following
ARTICLE IN PRESS
R.S. Wedemann et al. / Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 3367–3371
3368
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.
    • Notes
    Load more