4,532 research outputs found
A probabilistic framework for analysing the compositionality of conceptual combinations
Conceptual combination performs a fundamental role in creating the broad
range of compound phrases utilised in everyday language. This article provides
a novel probabilistic framework for assessing whether the semantics of conceptual
combinations are compositional, and so can be considered as a function of
the semantics of the constituent concepts, or not. While the systematicity and
productivity of language provide a strong argument in favor of assuming compositionality,
this very assumption is still regularly questioned in both cognitive
science and philosophy. Additionally, the principle of semantic compositionality
is underspecified, which means that notions of both "strong" and "weak"
compositionality appear in the literature. Rather than adjudicating between
different grades of compositionality, the framework presented here contributes
formal methods for determining a clear dividing line between compositional and
non-compositional semantics. In addition, we suggest that the distinction between
these is contextually sensitive. Compositionality is equated with a joint probability distribution modeling how the constituent concepts in the combination
are interpreted. Marginal selectivity is introduced as a pivotal probabilistic
constraint for the application of the Bell/CH and CHSH systems of inequalities.
Non-compositionality is equated with a failure of marginal selectivity, or violation
of either system of inequalities in the presence of marginal selectivity. This
means that the conceptual combination cannot be modeled in a joint probability
distribution, the variables of which correspond to how the constituent concepts
are being interpreted. The formal analysis methods are demonstrated by applying
them to an empirical illustration of twenty-four non-lexicalised conceptual
combinations
A Description Logic Framework for Commonsense Conceptual Combination Integrating Typicality, Probabilities and Cognitive Heuristics
We propose a nonmonotonic Description Logic of typicality able to account for
the phenomenon of concept combination of prototypical concepts. The proposed
logic relies on the logic of typicality ALC TR, whose semantics is based on the
notion of rational closure, as well as on the distributed semantics of
probabilistic Description Logics, and is equipped with a cognitive heuristic
used by humans for concept composition. We first extend the logic of typicality
ALC TR by typicality inclusions whose intuitive meaning is that "there is
probability p about the fact that typical Cs are Ds". As in the distributed
semantics, we define different scenarios containing only some typicality
inclusions, each one having a suitable probability. We then focus on those
scenarios whose probabilities belong to a given and fixed range, and we exploit
such scenarios in order to ascribe typical properties to a concept C obtained
as the combination of two prototypical concepts. We also show that reasoning in
the proposed Description Logic is EXPTIME-complete as for the underlying ALC.Comment: 39 pages, 3 figure
Building Machines That Learn and Think Like People
Recent progress in artificial intelligence (AI) has renewed interest in
building systems that learn and think like people. Many advances have come from
using deep neural networks trained end-to-end in tasks such as object
recognition, video games, and board games, achieving performance that equals or
even beats humans in some respects. Despite their biological inspiration and
performance achievements, these systems differ from human intelligence in
crucial ways. We review progress in cognitive science suggesting that truly
human-like learning and thinking machines will have to reach beyond current
engineering trends in both what they learn, and how they learn it.
Specifically, we argue that these machines should (a) build causal models of
the world that support explanation and understanding, rather than merely
solving pattern recognition problems; (b) ground learning in intuitive theories
of physics and psychology, to support and enrich the knowledge that is learned;
and (c) harness compositionality and learning-to-learn to rapidly acquire and
generalize knowledge to new tasks and situations. We suggest concrete
challenges and promising routes towards these goals that can combine the
strengths of recent neural network advances with more structured cognitive
models.Comment: In press at Behavioral and Brain Sciences. Open call for commentary
proposals (until Nov. 22, 2016).
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/information/calls-for-commentary/open-calls-for-commentar
- …