Life Perceives is a symposium bringing together scientists and artists for an open exploration of how “perception” can be understood as a phenomenon that does not only belong to humans, or even the so-called “higher organisms”, but exists across the entire spectrum of life in a myriad of forms. The symposium invites leading practitioners from the arts and sciences to present unique insights through short talks, open discussions, and artistic interventions that bring us slightly closer to the life worlds of plants and fungi, microbial communities and immune systems, cuttlefish and crows. What do we mean when we talk about perception in other species? Do other organisms have an experience of the world? Or does our human-centred perspective make understanding other forms of life on their own terms an impossible dream? Whatever your answers to these questions may be, we hope to unsettle them, and leave you more curious than when you arrived.

Analogical reasoning is related to everyday learning and scholastic learning and is a robust predictor of g. Therefore, children's ability to reason by analogy is often measured in a school context to gain insight into children's cognitive and intellectual functioning. Often, the ability to reason by analogy is measured by means of conventional, static instruments. Static tests are criticised by researchers and practitioners to provide an overview of what individuals have learned in the past and for this reason are assumed not to tap into the potential for learning, based on Vygotsky's zone of proximal development. This seminar will focus on children's potential for reasoning by analogy, as measured by means of a dynamic test, which has a test-training-test design. In so doing, the potential relationship between dynamic test outcomes and executive functioning will be explored.

Evidence-based education programmes, like many clinical interventions, are multi-faceted and can be expensive to implement. In this talk I will describe an alternative: distilling the common elements across many evidence-based programmes. Published programme manuals are selected through systematic review, then extensively coded and cross-referenced. Finally, the common elements that emerge are shared with practitioners as part of a ‘library’ of practices (rather than a holistic programme manual). Although the common elements methodology has been used in the prevention and intervention sciences, this project reflects the first attempt at applying this approach to early childhood education. I will describe the common elements methods and preliminary findings from our Nuffield-funded project, in collaboration with the Early Intervention Foundation. I will discuss the challenges and opportunities we have encountered, alongside our strategies for sharing evidence with practitioners in a digestible way.

Evolution has shaped neural circuits in a very specific manner, slowly and aimlessly incorporating computational innovations that increased the chances to survive and reproduce of the newly born species. The discoveries done by the Evolutionary Developmental (Evo-Devo) biology field during the last decades have been crucial for our understanding of the gradual emergence of such innovations. In turn, Computational Neuroscience practitioners modeling the brain are becoming increasingly aware of the need to build models that incorporate these innovations to replicate the computational strategies used by the brain to solve a given task. The goal of this workshop is to bring together experts from Systems and Computational Neuroscience, Machine Learning and the Evo-Devo field to discuss if and how knowing the evolutionary history of neural circuits can help us understand the way the brain works, as well as the relative importance of learned VS innate neural mechanisms.

Recurrent neural networks (RNNs) are powerful dynamical models, widely used in machine learning (ML) for processing sequential data, and also in neuroscience, to understand the emergent properties of networks of real neurons. Prior theoretical work in understanding the properties of RNNs has focused on models with additive interactions. However, real neurons can have gating i.e. multiplicative interactions, and gating is also a central feature of the best performing RNNs in machine learning. Here, we develop a dynamical mean-field theory (DMFT) to study the consequences of gating in RNNs. We use random matrix theory to show how gating robustly produces marginal stability and line attractors – important mechanisms for biologically-relevant computations requiring long memory. The long-time behavior of the gated network is studied using its Lyapunov spectrum, and the DMFT is used to provide a novel analytical expression for the maximum Lyapunov exponent demonstrating its close relation to relaxation-time of the dynamics. Gating is also shown to give rise to a novel, discontinuous transition to chaos, where the proliferation of critical points (topological complexity) is decoupled from the appearance of chaotic dynamics (dynamical complexity), contrary to a seminal result for additive RNNs. Critical surfaces and regions of marginal stability in the parameter space are indicated in phase diagrams, thus providing a map for principled parameter choices for ML practitioners. Finally, we develop a field-theory for gradients that arise in training, by incorporating the adjoint sensitivity framework from control theory in the DMFT. This paves the way for the use of powerful field-theoretic techniques to study training/gradients in large RNNs.

Over the past decade, the domain of face identity processing has seen a surging interest in inter-individual differences, with a focus on individuals with superior skills, so-called Super-Recognizers (SRs; Ramon et al., 2019; Russell et al., 2009). Their study can provide valuable insights into brain-behavior relationships and advance our understanding of neural functioning. Despite a decade of research, and similarly to the field of developmental prosopagnosia, a consensus on diagnostic criteria for SR identification is lacking. Consequently, SRs are currently identified either inconsistently, via suboptimal individual tests, or via undocumented collections of tests. This state of the field has two major implications. Firstly, our scientific understanding of SRs will remain at best limited. Secondly, the needs of government agencies interested in deploying SRs for real-life identity verification (e.g., policing) are unlikely to be met. To counteract these issues, I suggest the following action points. Firstly, based on our and others’ work suggesting novel and challenging tests of face cognition (Bobak et al., 2019; Fysh et al., in press; Stacchi et al., 2019), and my collaborations with international security agencies, I recommend novel diagnostic criteria for SR identification. These are currently being used to screen the Berlin State Police’s >25K employees before identifying SRs via bespoke testing procedures we have collaboratively developed over the past years. Secondly, I introduce a cohort of SRs identified using these criteria, which is being studied in-depth using behavioral methods, psychophysics, eye-tracking, and neuroimaging. Finally, I suggest data acquired for these individuals should be curated to develop and share best practices with researchers and practitioners, and to gain an accurate and transparent description of SR cases to exploit their informative value.