Cognitive Science Colloquia


Cognitive Science Colloquia are held* throughout the year and consist of seminars/talks given by invited speakers from various universities, as well as seminars by the METU staff or our own PhD students. The Colloquia aim to share information on cognitive science research, as well as promote academic research and collaboration. The seminars are open to anyone interested and provide an opportunity for our students to keep up with the recent research conducted in the field, allowing them to observe how research topics develop through academic exchange.

* Unless it is announced otherwise, seminars take place every Friday at 12:40, in the Informatics Institute (room II-03), METU.

For past years' colloquia, please visit here.



NEXT IN THE SERIES    >    Denial of Expectation in Turkish and in General: Insights and Prospects for a Logical Treatment

by Ceyhan Temürcü (Cognitive Science, METU)
on 17th of November, Friday, 12:40
in METU Informatics Institute, Room S-03

Abstract Apparently, all human languages have strategies for blocking possible inferences from a preceding clause or discourse segment. This sense, which take part in the semantic ranges in Turkish *ama *or *fakat*, and of English *but*, has often been dubbed 'denial of expectation' (DE) and subsumed under the more general family of 'contrastive' senses. In this talk, which reflects our joint work with Prof. Deniz Zeyrek, I will propose a general logical specification for the DE sense, arguing that DE denies a possible inference afforded by a counter-actual knowledge state. I will then compare this proposal to that of Winter and Rimon (1994), which is based on Veltman's (1986) data logic, and that of Toosarvandani (2014), which recruits Kratzer's (1981, 1991) analysis of modality.



This Year (2017-2018)

Fall Semester

Plans, Actions, and Sentences
by Cem Bozşahin (Cognitive Science, METU)
on 10th of November
[slides]

Abstract At the level of sentences, predicates bear thematic relations to their arguments, such as agent, patient, beneficiary. They show diversity in argument-taking, from intransitives to ditransitives. At the level of discourse we do not see such diversity, or sensitivity to thematic roles. Recursion is also one observable difference between discourse and sentence structure. The same differences appear to hold between plans, which are functions from states to states, and scripts, which are participant-taking functions with some affinity to thematic structure. Scripts are thematic-role sensitive whereas plans need not be. We summarise some thinking about linking planning and language, both cognitively, and evolutionarily.


Interaction between Language and Vision: Findings from Multimodal Comprehension Studies
by Cengiz Acartürk (Cognitive Science, METU)
on 3rd of November

Abstract The study of multimodal comprehension involves the investigation of linguistic and non-linguistic means of communication. The production of specific types of utterances, such as reference and deixis provide an appropriate testbed to study multimodal conceptualization of entities in the visual world. This talk will present findings in deictic cross-referencing in multimodal environments under various communication modalities.


Cognitive Science meets Social Science: Joint Action Paradigms for Adults and Children
by Annette Hohenberger (Cognitive Science, METU)
on 27th of October
[slides]

Abstract Within the last decades, cognitive science has seen a surge in joint (dual- and multiple-agent) task paradigms extending the classical individual paradigms. This development leads to an overlap with social science and promises some fruitful interdisciplinary integration across the two fields. On this path, similar yet different paradigms such as “social facilitation” and “joint action” need to be distinguished, though. In this talk I want to present some recent showcase studies conducted by our Cogs students which highlight the benefits of various joint paradigms as well as their challenges, studying adults and children: the role of joint action in time perception (Kerem Alp Usal, 2016); co-representation of a partner’s task in children (Esra Katircioglu Terzi, 2017); joint change-detection (Mustafa Akkuscu, 2017); and joint tool-making in children (Gökhan Gönül, ongoing). I will lay particular emphasis on the particular task structure used to study joint action, the possible mechanism(s) underlying it and the differential role of collaboration vs competition. The talk will conclude with an outlook on future research along the lines of this exciting new interdisciplinary research agenda.


Characterization of the Purkinje Cell to Nuclear Cell Connections in Mice Cerebellum
by Orkan Özcan (Neuroscience, CNRS)
on 20th of October
[slides TBA]

Abstract The cerebellum integrates motor commands with somatosensory, vestibular, visual and auditory information for motor learning and coordination functions. The final step of this integration is done in the deep cerebellar nuclei (DCN) that process inputs from Purkinje cells (PC) and the two main inputs of the cerebellum: mossy and climbing fibers. We investigated the properties of PC connections from the lobule IV/V of the cerebellar cortex to the different DCN cell types in the medial nuclei using optogenetic stimulation in L7-ChR2 mice combined with in vivo multi electrode extracellular recordings. We identified two groups of DCN cells with significant differences in their action potential waveforms and firing rates which matched with the properties of GABAergic and non-GABAergic cells discriminated in vitro. The discharge of the DCN cells was correlated to the local field potentials and we found that DCN cells were phase locked to oscillations in the beta, gamma and high frequency bands. Although optogenetic stimulation of PCs resulted in the inhibition of the two groups of DCN cells (rate coding), spike times were controlled only for non-GABAergic cells. Moreover, local inhibition onto non-GABAergic cells was not observed in our in vivo experiments. Our results suggest that synchronized PC inputs drive the output of cerebellum by temporally controlling only non-GABAergic cells. Also, the internal DCN circuitry supports this phenomenon since GABAergic cells are not temporally controlled and the local inhibition they provide does not alter the time-locked output of the DCN.