Location of Repository

Categorical invariance and structural complexity in human concept learning

By Professor Ronaldo Vigo

Abstract

An alternative account of human concept learning based on an invariance measure of the categorical\ud stimulus is proposed. The categorical invariance model (CIM) characterizes the degree of structural\ud complexity of a Boolean category as a function of its inherent degree of invariance and its cardinality or\ud size. To do this we introduce a mathematical framework based on the notion of a Boolean differential\ud operator on Boolean categories that generates the degrees of invariance (i.e., logical manifold) of the\ud category in respect to its dimensions. Using this framework, we propose that the structural complexity\ud of a Boolean category is indirectly proportional to its degree of categorical invariance and directly\ud proportional to its cardinality or size. Consequently, complexity and invariance notions are formally\ud unified to account for concept learning difficulty. Beyond developing the above unifying mathematical\ud framework, the CIM is significant in that: (1) it precisely predicts the key learning difficulty ordering of\ud the SHJ [Shepard, R. N., Hovland, C. L.,&Jenkins, H. M. (1961). Learning and memorization of classifications.\ud Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 75(13), 1-42] Boolean category types consisting of three\ud binary dimensions and four positive examples; (2) it is, in general, a good quantitative predictor of the\ud degree of learning difficulty of a large class of categories (in particular, the 41 category types studied\ud by Feldman [Feldman, J. (2000). Minimization of Boolean complexity in human concept learning. Nature,\ud 407, 630-633]); (3) it is, in general, a good quantitative predictor of parity effects for this large class of\ud categories; (4) it does all of the above without free parameters; and (5) it is cognitively plausible (e.g.,\ud cognitively tractable)

Topics: Cognitive Psychology, Artificial Intelligence, Complexity Theory, Machine Learning, Perceptual Cognitive Psychology, Logic, Psychophysics
Year: 2009
OAI identifier: oai:cogprints.org:7132
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://cogprints.org/7132/1/Vi... (external link)
  • http://cogprints.org/7132/ (external link)
  • Suggested articles

    Preview

    Citations

    1. (2003). A catalog of Boolean concepts.
    2. (1992). ALCOVE: An exemplar-based connectionistmodel of category learning.
    3. (2006). An algebra of human concept learning.
    4. (1965). Attribute-and-rule learning aspects of conceptual behavior.
    5. (1964). Conjunctive and disjunctive concept formation under equal-information conditions.
    6. (1963). Effects of transfer and problem structure in disjunctive concept formation. doi
    7. (1970). Good patterns have few alternatives.
    8. (1963). Goodness of pattern and pattern uncertainty.
    9. (1966). Human conceptual behavior.
    10. (1970). Integrality of stimulus dimensions in various types of information processing.
    11. (1956). Introduction to Mathematical Logic.
    12. (1958). Logical design of electrical circuits.
    13. (2000). Minimization of Boolean complexity in human concept learning.
    14. (2006). Models of categorization. In
    15. (1960). Order of consideration of different types of concepts.
    16. (1977). Pattern similarity and cognitive transformations.
    17. (2003). Similarity as transformation.
    18. (1974). The processing of information and structure.
    19. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems.
    20. (2003). The simplicity principle in human concept learning.
    21. (1951). The Staff of the Computation Laboratory at Harvard University. In Synthesis of electronic computing and control circuits. Cambridge:

    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.