Advances in artificial intelligence have raised a basic question about human intelligence: Is human reasoning best emulated by applying task‐specific knowledge acquired from a wealth of prior experience, or is it based on the domain‐general manipulation and comparison of mental representations? We address this question for the case of visual analogical reasoning. Using realistic images of familiar three‐dimensional objects (cars and their parts), we systematically manipulated viewpoints, part relations, and entity properties in visual analogy problems. We compared human performance to that of two recent deep learning models (Siamese Network and Relation Network) that were directly trained to solve these problems and to apply their task‐specific knowledge to analogical reasoning. We also developed a new model using part‐based comparison (PCM) by applying a domain‐general mapping procedure to learned representations of cars and their component parts. Across four‐term analogies (Experiment 1) and open‐ended analogies (Experiment 2), the domain‐general PCM model, but not the task‐specific deep learning models, generated performance similar in key aspects to that of human reasoners. These findings provide evidence that human‐like analogical reasoning is unlikely to be achieved by applying deep learning with big data to a specific type of analogy problem. Rather, humans do (and machines might) achieve analogical reasoning by learning representations that encode structural information useful for multiple tasks, coupled with efficient computation of relational similarity.
- Award ID(s):
- 1827374
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10231806
- Editor(s):
- Fitch, T.; Lamm, C.; Leder, H.; Teßmar-Raible, K.
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
more » « less
By middle childhood, humans are able to learn abstract semantic relations (e.g., antonym, synonym, category membership) and use them to reason by analogy. A deep theoretical challenge is to show how such abstract relations can arise from nonrelational inputs, thereby providing key elements of a protosymbolic representation system. We have developed a computational model that exploits the potential synergy between deep learning from “big data” (to create semantic features for individual words) and supervised learning from “small data” (to create representations of semantic relations between words). Given as inputs labeled pairs of lexical representations extracted by deep learning, the model creates augmented representations by remapping features according to the rank of differences between values for the two words in each pair. These augmented representations aid in coping with the feature alignment problem (e.g., matching those features that make “love-hate” an antonym with the different features that make “rich-poor” an antonym). The model extracts weight distributions that are used to estimate the probabilities that new word pairs instantiate each relation, capturing the pattern of human typicality judgments for a broad range of abstract semantic relations. A measure of relational similarity can be derived and used to solve simple verbal analogies with human-level accuracy. Because each acquired relation has a modular representation, basic symbolic operations are enabled (notably, the converse of any learned relation can be formed without additional training). Abstract semantic relations can be induced by bootstrapping from nonrelational inputs, thereby enabling relational generalization and analogical reasoning.
-
more » « less
Abstract Qualitative spatial/temporal reasoning (QSR/QTR) plays a key role in research on human cognition, e.g., as it relates to navigation, as well as in work on robotics and artificial intelligence. Although previous work has mainly focused on various spatial and temporal calculi, more recently representation learning techniques such as embedding have been applied to reasoning and inference tasks such as query answering and knowledge base completion. These subsymbolic and learnable representations are well suited for handling noise and efficiency problems that plagued prior work. However, applying embedding techniques to spatial and temporal reasoning has received little attention to date. In this paper, we explore two research questions: (1) How do embedding-based methods perform empirically compared to traditional reasoning methods on QSR/QTR problems? (2) If the embedding-based methods are better, what causes this superiority? In order to answer these questions, we first propose a hyperbolic embedding model, called HyperQuaternionE, to capture varying properties of relations (such as symmetry and anti-symmetry), to learn inversion relations and relation compositions (i.e., composition tables), and to model hierarchical structures over entities induced by transitive relations. We conduct various experiments on two synthetic datasets to demonstrate the advantages of our proposed embedding-based method against existing embedding models as well as traditional reasoners with respect to entity inference and relation inference. Additionally, our qualitative analysis reveals that our method is able to learn conceptual neighborhoods implicitly. We conclude that the success of our method is attributed to its ability to model composition tables and learn conceptual neighbors, which are among the core building blocks of QSR/QTR.
-
Many computational models of reasoning rely on explicit relation representations to account for human cognitive capacities such as analogical reasoning. Relational luring, a phenomenon observed in recognition memory, has been interpreted as evidence that explicit relation representations also impact episodic memory; however, this assumption has not been rigorously assessed by computational modeling. We implemented an established model of recognition memory, the Generalized Context Model (GCM), as a framework for simulating human performance on an old/new recognition task that elicits relational luring. Within this basic theoretical framework, we compared representations based on explicit relations, lexical semantics (i.e., individual word meanings), and a combination of the two. We compared the same alternative representations as predictors of accuracy in solving explicit verbal analogies. In accord with previous work, we found that explicit relation representations are necessary for modeling analogical reasoning. In contrast, preliminary simulations incorporating model parameters optimized to fit human data reproduce relational luring using any of the alternative representations, including one based on non-relational lexical semantics. Further work on model comparisons is needed to examine the contributions of lexical semantics and relations on the luring effect in recognition memory.more » « less
-
Analogy problems involving multiple ordered relations of the same type create mapping ambiguity, requiring some mechanism for relational integration to achieve mapping accuracy. We address the question of whether the integration of ordered relations depends on their logical form alone, or on semantic representations that differ across relation types. We developed a triplet mapping task that provides a basic paradigm to investigate analogical reasoning with simple relational structures. Experimental results showed that mapping performance differed across orderings based on category, linear order, and causal relations, providing evidence that each transitive relation has its own semantic representation. Hence, human analogical mapping of ordered relations does not depend solely on their formal property of transitivity. Instead, human ability to solve mapping problems by integrating relations relies on the semantics of relation representations. We also compared human performance to the performance of several vector-based computational models of analogy. These models performed above chance but fell short of human performance for some relations, highlighting the need for further model development.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
