Regular article
What is modelling for? a critical review of the models of path integration

https://doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.1995.0154Get rights and content

Abstract

Path integration (dead reckoning) is a computational process by which an animal can keep track of its position relative to some starting point by relying on self-generated information collected en route. The purpose of this paper is two-fold: first, to review four important models of path integration, analysing how the different models have evolved as a result of the authors’ particular focus; second, to assess what they have brought to the understanding of path integration. The more specific the model, the less it will be possible to apply it to different situations; the more general its nature, the less adequately it will represent the details of the behaviour to be modelled. In this context, the paper discusses how the authors envisioned the role of homing errors. The usefulness and limits of the different perspectives is discussed, in particular how well the models fit with observations. Finally, ways of improving and developing the modelling process are proposed.

References (0)

Cited by (101)

  • Dissociating spatial strategies in animal research: Critical methodological review with focus on egocentric navigation and the hippocampus

    2021, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
    Citation Excerpt :

    While it is our view that the evidence leans toward hippocampal involvement, these studies have very low sample sizes and very different methods, and thus do not offer any clear-cut conclusion. Furthermore, it should be appreciated that path integration, an egocentric process in nature, is a very complex behaviour and there have been many attempts to model it mathematically, though with limited success (Maurer and Séguinot, 1995). Notwithstanding being an egocentric process, it has been suggested to be the neural basis of the cognitive map (McNaughton et al., 2006), which by definition is allocentric.

  • A computational model of mapping in echolocating bats

    2017, Animal Behaviour
    Citation Excerpt :

    While, in robotics, (cognitive) maps are usually considered as the only reliable navigation mechanism, biologists have pointed out that cognitive maps are not necessary for reliable navigation (see Bennett, 1996; Cheung et al., 2014; Franz & Mallot, 2000; Trullier et al., 1997, for discussions and references). It has even been questioned whether humans are capable of building cognitive maps of complex environments (Maurer & Séguinot, 1995). As such, the ability of bats to remember flight routes and to return to roosting places based on echolocation (Barchi et al., 2013; Stones & Branick, 1969; Williams et al., 1966) cannot be taken as sufficient evidence of them having a cognitive map.

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text