What is foraging?

IF 1.8 1区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Biology & Philosophy Pub Date : 2024-02-12 DOI:10.1007/s10539-024-09939-z
{"title":"What is foraging?","authors":"","doi":"10.1007/s10539-024-09939-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Abstract</h3> <p>Foraging is a central competence of all mobile organisms. Models and concepts from foraging theory have been applied widely throughout biology to the search for many kinds of external resources, including food, sexual encounters, minerals, water, and the like. In cognitive science and neuroscience, the tools of foraging theory are increasingly applied to a wide range of other types of search, including for abstract resources like information or for internal resources like memories, concepts, and strategies for problem solving. Despite its importance in ecology and increasing relevance for the study of cognition, the concept of foraging is rarely analyzed. Here, I aim to rectify this situation. I outline three desiderata: first, an analysis should differentiate foraging from search and decision making more generally; second, an analysis should unify different types of foraging; and third, an analysis should help ground predictions. I present an analysis of foraging as the serial search for general resources in accept-or-reject, exclusive, persistent decision contexts. Not all search is serial and not all decision making is exclusive, differentiating foraging from search and decision making generally. With the aid of Markov decision processes and directed cyclical models, I show how the analysis implies a cyclical graph. This cyclical graph is embedded in the description of many types of foraging, unifying the different instances. Finally, I argue that the cyclical graph is also embedded in representations of novel task contexts that have not previously been viewed as foraging. I illustrate this novel application of the concept of foraging by arguing that reasoning is a type of foraging.</p>","PeriodicalId":55368,"journal":{"name":"Biology & Philosophy","volume":"144 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biology & Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-024-09939-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Foraging is a central competence of all mobile organisms. Models and concepts from foraging theory have been applied widely throughout biology to the search for many kinds of external resources, including food, sexual encounters, minerals, water, and the like. In cognitive science and neuroscience, the tools of foraging theory are increasingly applied to a wide range of other types of search, including for abstract resources like information or for internal resources like memories, concepts, and strategies for problem solving. Despite its importance in ecology and increasing relevance for the study of cognition, the concept of foraging is rarely analyzed. Here, I aim to rectify this situation. I outline three desiderata: first, an analysis should differentiate foraging from search and decision making more generally; second, an analysis should unify different types of foraging; and third, an analysis should help ground predictions. I present an analysis of foraging as the serial search for general resources in accept-or-reject, exclusive, persistent decision contexts. Not all search is serial and not all decision making is exclusive, differentiating foraging from search and decision making generally. With the aid of Markov decision processes and directed cyclical models, I show how the analysis implies a cyclical graph. This cyclical graph is embedded in the description of many types of foraging, unifying the different instances. Finally, I argue that the cyclical graph is also embedded in representations of novel task contexts that have not previously been viewed as foraging. I illustrate this novel application of the concept of foraging by arguing that reasoning is a type of foraging.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
什么是觅食?
摘要 觅食是所有移动生物的核心能力。觅食理论的模型和概念在整个生物学中被广泛应用于寻找多种外部资源,包括食物、艳遇、矿物质、水等。在认知科学和神经科学领域,觅食理论的工具越来越多地应用于其他各种类型的搜索,包括对信息等抽象资源的搜索,或对记忆、概念和解决问题的策略等内部资源的搜索。尽管觅食在生态学中非常重要,而且与认知研究的相关性也越来越大,但人们却很少对觅食的概念进行分析。在此,我旨在纠正这种状况。我概括了三个必要条件:第一,分析应将觅食与搜索和更一般的决策制定区分开来;第二,分析应将不同类型的觅食统一起来;第三,分析应有助于为预测提供依据。我提出的觅食分析是指在接受或拒绝、排他性、持续性决策环境中对一般资源的连续搜索。并非所有的搜索都是连续的,也并非所有的决策都是排他性的,这就将觅食与一般的搜索和决策区分开来。借助马尔可夫决策过程和有向循环模型,我展示了该分析如何隐含一个循环图。这种循环图蕴含在多种觅食类型的描述中,统一了不同的实例。最后,我认为循环图还包含在以前未被视为觅食的新任务情境的表征中。我通过论证推理是觅食的一种类型,来说明觅食概念的这一新颖应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Biology & Philosophy
Biology & Philosophy 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.00%
发文量
48
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Recent decades have witnessed fascinating and controversial advances in the biological sciences. This journal answers the need for meta-theoretical analysis, both about the very nature of biology, as well as about its social implications. Biology and Philosophy is aimed at a broad readership, drawn from both the sciences and the humanities. The journal subscribes to no specific school of biology, nor of philosophy, and publishes work from authors of all persuasions and all disciplines. The editorial board reflects this attitude in its composition and its world-wide membership. Each issue of Biology and Philosophy carries one or more discussions or comparative reviews, permitting the in-depth study of important works and topics.
期刊最新文献
"Shape is everything: on proteins' functions": Author. Model organism futures in precision toxicology: tracking the emergence of a research repertoire. A commitment account of norm externalisation. What is social constructionism about race? A reply to Hochman. A bounded hierarchy framework for the evolution of syntax.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1