The seven second memory thingy....

[Marcus Fox]

I do not believe this is true. as my fish know they are going to be fed as
soon as they feel the vibration caused by me putting down the pot of food on
the stand and as I lift the corner of the condensation cover where I always
feed from, they all hang out at that corner near the top.

Opinions?

Marcus

[Tedd Jacobs]

"Marcus Fox" wrote...
> I do not believe this is true. as my fish know they are going to be fed as
> soon as they feel the vibration caused by me putting down the pot of food on
> the stand and as I lift the corner of the condensation cover where I always
> feed from, they all hang out at that corner near the top.
>
> Opinions?

conditioned response, (not a memory thingy). i.e. pavlov's dog.

[[email protected]]

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 17:32:16 -0000, "Marcus Fox"
> wrote:

>I do not believe this is true. as my fish know they are going to be fed as
>soon as they feel the vibration caused by me putting down the pot of food on
>the stand and as I lift the corner of the condensation cover where I always
>feed from, they all hang out at that corner near the top.
>
>Opinions?
>
>Marcus
>


Marcus,

It's not memory of events. It is the learning of associations. They
have learned to associate feeding with the floor vibration. If you did
something else before feeding like ring a bell or flash a light they
would learn that in a few days. Fish can learn quite complex
associations. For example they have learned that I feed them and so,
if I go near the tank, they respond to me. Anyone else is ignored. To
a fish my shape and the floor vibration are recognised. Other people
shape and sounds don't mean food! Some fish like Cichlids learn very
quickly. Much faster than mammals and birds, but it could be because
they balance risk with reward differently.


Steve
--
EasyNN-plus. The easy way to build neural networks.
Build networks from numeric, text and image files.
http://www.easynn.com

[Philip Ash]

> wrote in message
...

>
> Marcus,
>
> It's not memory of events. It is the learning of associations. They
> have learned to associate feeding with the floor vibration. If you did
> something else before feeding like ring a bell or flash a light they
> would learn that in a few days. Fish can learn quite complex
> associations. For example they have learned that I feed them and so,
> if I go near the tank, they respond to me. Anyone else is ignored. To
> a fish my shape and the floor vibration are recognised. Other people
> shape and sounds don't mean food! Some fish like Cichlids learn very
> quickly. Much faster than mammals and birds, but it could be because
> they balance risk with reward differently.
>
>
> Steve
> --

Maybe its just me, but surely they have to remember that you = food and
calculate others = no food.
The fact that fish can quickly (as you say, a few days) learn this and then
re-use this information daily, and then not forget it if you were say to be
away for a month, is significant.
This kind of behaviour cannot be explained with out memory and a also a
degree of intelligence.

Phil.

[Tedd Jacobs]

"Philip Ash" wrote...
> > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >
> > Marcus,
> >
> > It's not memory of events. It is the learning of associations. They
> > have learned to associate feeding with the floor vibration. If you did
> > something else before feeding like ring a bell or flash a light they
> > would learn that in a few days. Fish can learn quite complex
> > associations. For example they have learned that I feed them and so,
> > if I go near the tank, they respond to me. Anyone else is ignored. To
> > a fish my shape and the floor vibration are recognised. Other people
> > shape and sounds don't mean food! Some fish like Cichlids learn very
> > quickly. Much faster than mammals and birds, but it could be because
> > they balance risk with reward differently.
> >
> >
> > Steve
> > --
>
> Maybe its just me, but surely they have to remember that you = food and
> calculate others = no food.
> The fact that fish can quickly (as you say, a few days) learn this and then
> re-use this information daily, and then not forget it if you were say to be
> away for a month, is significant.
> This kind of behaviour cannot be explained with out memory and a also a
> degree of intelligence.
>

yes it can. it is called "conditioned response". place your hand on a hot burner
and you'll remove your hand before the nerve signal of the burning sensation
even reaches your brain, this is a reflex action in response to a stimulus input
that requires no cognitive thought, intelligence, or memory (reflexes occur in
the spinal column). the next time you see your hand about to touch a burner you
flinch, this is also a reflexive action conditioned by the experience of getting
burned, it also occurs without the brain's "consent". that is why we cannot
control our reflexes, only condition them (train them).

an example of this is pavlov's dog. in a nutshell; pavlov would ring a bell each
time right before he'd feed a dog. the dog associated the stimulus input (in
this case sound) to food. the food triggered a reflexive response of 'drool'
without having to think "oh boy! food!". the ringing of the bell then eventually
conditioned a response of 'drooling' each time it was rung. to further exemplify
this; drooling is an involuntary action (like breathing, a heartbeat, blinking),
not a voluntary action. this means that 'drooling' cannot be turned off and on
at will of thought, it has to be triggered by a stimulus, thusly; pavlov's dog
drooling when it hears a bell is an example of a conditioned response.

it could be argued that the fish getting excited over the appearance of the food
giver is more than a reflexive reaction, but the action is still triggered by a
reflexive habit conditioned to respond to the appearance of the food giver. do
you "think" about looking behind you before you back out of your driveway? no,
it is a reflexive habit to look first.

hth. (if not just yell and i'll pull out the book for a better explanation of it
instead of flying off the top of my head) ;-)

tedd.

[Eric Schreiber]

"Tedd Jacobs" > wrote:

>> This kind of behaviour cannot be explained with out memory
>> and a also a degree of intelligence.

>yes it can. it is called "conditioned response".

I would think that a good argument could be made that conditioned
response involves memory. Not cognition necessarily, but the ability
to store a cause-effect sequence is required to create a new response
to stimuli. And storage, by definition, is memory.

It's certainly not on a par with recalling how much you enjoyed the
BBQ at the beach last summer, but to build an association that says
"this event means that event", such as learning that a certain
vibration means food is coming, implies that the event sequence is
remembered.


--
www.ericschreiber.com

[coelacanth]

You're conflating reflex and conditioned response. Individuals
with extreme short term memory loss cannot be conditioned
(viz Alzheimer's patients), but will still jerk reflexively
from a heat source (unless there is brainstem degeneration).
Pavlovian response is something different yet--it's the
creation of a novel response to some stimuli (drooling when
a bell is sounded). I'd argue that, since swimming towards
a food source is a natural response, it's not Pavlovian (but
hair-splitting is an occupational hazard for me).

IME, some fish have "memory" (cichlids) and some have
none (neon tetras) and come when you feed them or not
depending. Of course this could also be an indication
of overall intelligence, feeding behaviors, etc.

I do know that goldfish can be taught to swim a maze with
a food reward and will swim it faster the more times they try.
This effect is noticeable even after weeks of not being in the
maze, indicating persistent memory.

Of course the maze experiment even works for earthworms
and planaria. Then there is the memory study which showed
that if you fed "naive" planaria groundup extract of "trained"
planaria, they ran the maze faster than those who weren't
give a the extract. blah, blah, blah--this is the point when
people usually leave me to go find the punchbowl at parties...

-coelacanth

> yes it can. it is called "conditioned response". place your hand on a hot
burner
> and you'll remove your hand before the nerve signal of the burning
sensation
> even reaches your brain, this is a reflex action in response to a stimulus
input
> that requires no cognitive thought, intelligence, or memory (reflexes
occur in
> the spinal column). the next time you see your hand about to touch a
burner you
> flinch, this is also a reflexive action conditioned by the experience of
getting
> burned, it also occurs without the brain's "consent". that is why we
cannot
> control our reflexes, only condition them (train them).
>
> an example of this is pavlov's dog. in a nutshell; pavlov would ring a
bell each
> time right before he'd feed a dog. the dog associated the stimulus input
(in
> this case sound) to food. the food triggered a reflexive response of
'drool'
> without having to think "oh boy! food!". the ringing of the bell then
eventually
> conditioned a response of 'drooling' each time it was rung. to further
exemplify
> this; drooling is an involuntary action (like breathing, a heartbeat,
blinking),
> not a voluntary action. this means that 'drooling' cannot be turned off
and on
> at will of thought, it has to be triggered by a stimulus, thusly; pavlov's
dog
> drooling when it hears a bell is an example of a conditioned response.
>
> it could be argued that the fish getting excited over the appearance of
the food
> giver is more than a reflexive reaction, but the action is still triggered
by a
> reflexive habit conditioned to respond to the appearance of the food
giver. do
> you "think" about looking behind you before you back out of your driveway?
no,
> it is a reflexive habit to look first.
>
> hth. (if not just yell and i'll pull out the book for a better explanation
of it
> instead of flying off the top of my head) ;-)
>
> tedd.
>
>

[Gizela]

My fish do the same, the platies especially

Angela

"Marcus Fox" > wrote in
message ...
> I do not believe this is true. as my fish know they are going to be fed as
> soon as they feel the vibration caused by me putting down the pot of food
on
> the stand and as I lift the corner of the condensation cover where I
always
> feed from, they all hang out at that corner near the top.
>
> Opinions?
>
> Marcus
>
>

[[email protected]]

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 20:24:13 -0000, "Philip Ash"
> wrote:

>
>
>
> wrote in message
...
>
>>
>> Marcus,
>>
>> It's not memory of events. It is the learning of associations. They
>> have learned to associate feeding with the floor vibration. If you did
>> something else before feeding like ring a bell or flash a light they
>> would learn that in a few days. Fish can learn quite complex
>> associations. For example they have learned that I feed them and so,
>> if I go near the tank, they respond to me. Anyone else is ignored. To
>> a fish my shape and the floor vibration are recognised. Other people
>> shape and sounds don't mean food! Some fish like Cichlids learn very
>> quickly. Much faster than mammals and birds, but it could be because
>> they balance risk with reward differently.
>>
>>
>> Steve
>> --
>
>Maybe its just me, but surely they have to remember that you = food and
>calculate others = no food.

No, that's a learned response. It's much simpler than memory. Some
responses don't even need learning. Eg. if it burns your finger pull
your finger away. Fish are the same with anything they can sense.

>The fact that fish can quickly (as you say, a few days) learn this and then
>re-use this information daily, and then not forget it if you were say to be
>away for a month, is significant.
>This kind of behaviour cannot be explained with out memory and a also a
>degree of intelligence.
>

It's a fine line between learning associations and memory. Acquired
responses become "hard wired" and do not need to take up memory space.

Think layers, the top layer is perception and instinct, the second
layer is learning, then all the remaining layers are memory.

I have been working in the area of artificial learning methods for
years. Simulations on PC's can learn associations so something as
smart as a fish has no trouble at all.


Steve
--
EasyNN-plus. The easy way to build neural networks.
Build networks from numeric, text and image files.
http://www.easynn.com

[James and Vikki Gilby]

<snip>
blah, blah, blah--this is the point when
> people usually leave me to go find the punchbowl at parties...

LOL-not me I find it interesting.

[Tedd Jacobs]

"James and Vikki Gilby" > wrote in message
news:eUODb.12031$J77.456@fed1read07...
> <snip>
> blah, blah, blah--this is the point when
> > people usually leave me to go find the punchbowl at parties...
>
> LOL-not me I find it interesting.
>

did one you say something...? i was betting on the goldifsh running the maze in
the punchbowl. ;-)

[Tedd Jacobs]

"Eric Schreiber" > wrote in message
...
> "Tedd Jacobs" > wrote:
>
> >> This kind of behaviour cannot be explained with out memory
> >> and a also a degree of intelligence.
>
> >yes it can. it is called "conditioned response".
>
> I would think that a good argument could be made that conditioned
> response involves memory. Not cognition necessarily, but the ability
> to store a cause-effect sequence is required to create a new response
> to stimuli. And storage, by definition, is memory.

point taken. thats one i cant fully refute off the top of my head. i'm sure
there is a hair to split somewhere in there, but i dont know what it is outside
of saying "instinct vs. reason; a black cat". ;-)

[Tedd Jacobs]

"coelacanth" > wrote in message
. com...
> You're conflating reflex and conditioned response. Individuals
> with extreme short term memory loss cannot be conditioned
> (viz Alzheimer's patients), but will still jerk reflexively
> from a heat source (unless there is brainstem degeneration).
> Pavlovian response is something different yet--it's the
> creation of a novel response to some stimuli (drooling when
> a bell is sounded). I'd argue that, since swimming towards
> a food source is a natural response, it's not Pavlovian (but
> hair-splitting is an occupational hazard for me).

that is an interesting idea,... i like your idea of a "natural response"
combined with steve's reply of "learned response".

btw, i hear they are running the goldfish maze 500 over in the punchbowl later.

[Eric Schreiber]

"Tedd Jacobs" > wrote:

>point taken. thats one i cant fully refute off the top of my head. i'm sure
>there is a hair to split somewhere in there, but i dont know what it is outside
>of saying "instinct vs. reason; a black cat". ;-)

No doubt the formal studies and science of memory and learning are so
full of arcane definitions, layers and theories that none of us
outside that field have any real hope of understanding it all. My
knowledge of it is certainly far from perfect and probably flawed.


--
www.ericschreiber.com

[[email protected]]

In rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc coelacanth > wrote:

Hey, coelacanth, I though you were dead!


--
.................................................. ............................

"Listen to those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who have found it."

Andre Gide

.................................................. ............................
http://www.memeticcandiru.com

[coelacanth]

> In rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc coelacanth > wrote:
>
> Hey, coelacanth, I though you were dead!
>
Rumors of my extinction have been greatly exaggerated.

[Tedd Jacobs]

"coelacanth" > wrote in message
. com...
> > In rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc coelacanth > wrote:
> >
> > Hey, coelacanth, I though you were dead!
> >
> Rumors of my extinction have been greatly exaggerated.

good thing we were still making payments on the urn.