The Emergent Structure of Semantic Knowledge - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 37
About This Presentation
Title:

The Emergent Structure of Semantic Knowledge

Description:

The Emergent Structure of Semantic Knowledge Jay McClelland Department of Psychology and Center for Mind, Brain, and Computation Stanford University – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:55
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 38
Provided by: JayM57
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: The Emergent Structure of Semantic Knowledge


1
The Emergent Structure of Semantic Knowledge
  • Jay McClelland
  • Department of Psychology andCenter for Mind,
    Brain, and ComputationStanford University

2
The Parallel Distributed Processing Approach to
Semantic Cognition
  • Representation is a pattern of activation
    distributed over neurons within and across brain
    areas.
  • Bidirectional propagation of activation underlies
    the ability to bring these representations to
    mind from given inputs.
  • The knowledge underlying propagation of
    activation is in the connections.
  • Experience affects our knowledge representations
    through a gradual connection adjustment process

3
Distributed Representationsand Overlapping
Patterns for Related Concepts
dog goat hammer
4
Kiani et al, J Neurophysiol 97 42964309, 2007.
5
Emergence of Meaning and Metaphor
  • Learned distributed representations that capture
    important aspects of meaning emerge through a
    gradual learning process in simple connectionist
    networks
  • Metaphor arises naturally as a byproduct of
    learning information in homologous domains in
    models of this type

6
Emergence of Meaning Differentiation,
Reorganization, and Context-Sensitivity
7
(No Transcript)
8
The Rumelhart Model
9
The Training Data
All propositions true of items at the bottom
levelof the tree, e.g. Robin can grow, move,
fly
10
Target output for robin can input
11
Forward Propagation of Activation
12
Back Propagation of Error (d)
aj
wij
ai
di Sdkwki
wki
dk (tk-ak)
Error-correcting learning At the output
layer Dwki edkai At the prior layer Dwij
edjaj
13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
Early Later LaterStill
Experie nce
16
(No Transcript)
17
What Drives Progressive Differentiation?
  • Waves of differentiation reflect coherent
    covariation of properties across items.
  • Patterns of coherent covariation are reflected in
    the principal components of the property
    covariance matrix.
  • Figure shows attribute loadings on the first
    three principal components
  • 1. Plants vs. animals
  • 2. Birds vs. fish
  • 3. Trees vs. flowers
  • Same color features covary in
    component
  • Diff color anti-covarying
    features

18
Sensitivity to Coherence Requires Convergence
A
A
19
Conceptual Reorganization (Carey, 1985)
  • Carey demonstrated that young children discover
    the unity of plants and animals as living things
    with many shared properties only around the age
    of 10.
  • She suggested that the coalescence of the concept
    of living thing depends on learning about diverse
    aspects of plants and animals including
  • Nature of life sustaining processes
  • What it means to be dead vs. alive
  • Reproductive properties
  • Can reorganization occur in a connectionist net?

20
Conceptual Reorganization in the Model
  • Suppose superficial appearance information, which
    is not coherent with much else, is always
    available
  • And there is a pattern of coherent covariation
    across information that is contingently available
    in different contexts.
  • The model forms initial representations based on
    superficial appearances.
  • Later, it discovers the shared structure that
    cuts across the different contexts, reorganizing
    its representations.

21
(No Transcript)
22
Organization of Conceptual Knowledge Early and
Late in Development
23
(No Transcript)
24
Overall Structure Extracted by a Structured
Statistical Model
25
(No Transcript)
26
Sensitivity to Context
Context-general representation
Context-sensitive representation
27
Relation-specificrepresentations
  • IS Representations (top) reflect idiosyncratic
    appearance properties.
  • HAS representations are similar to the
    context-general representations (middle).
  • Can representations collapse differences between
    plants, since there is little that plants can do.
  • The fish are all the same, because theres no
    difference in what they can do.

28
Ongoing Work
  • Can the representations learned in the
    distributed connectionist model capture different
    patterns of generalization of different kinds of
    properties?
  • Simulations already show context-specific
    patterns of property generalization.
  • We are currently collecting detailed data from a
    new data set to explore the sufficiency of the
    model to explain experimental data on context
    specific patterns of generalization.

29
Generalization of different property types
  • At different points in training, the network is
    taught one of
  • Maple can queem
  • Maple is queem
  • Maple has queem
  • Only weights from hidden to output are allowed to
    change.
  • Network is then tested to see how strongly
    queem is activated then same relation is paired
    with other items.

queem
30
Generalization to other concepts after training
with can, has, or is queem
31
Ongoing Work
  • Can the representations learned in the
    distributed connectionist model capture different
    patterns of generalization of different kinds of
    properties?
  • Our simulations already show context-specific
    patterns of property generalization.
  • We are currently conducting new experiments to
    gather experimental data on context specific
    patterns of generalization that we will use to
    test an extended version of the model trained
    with a much larger training set.

32
Metaphor in Connectionist Models of Semantics
  • By metaphor I mean the application of a
    relation learned in one domain to a novel
    situation in another

33
Hintons Family Tree Network
34
English Tree Recovered
Italian Tree Recovered
35
Understanding Via Metaphor in the Family Trees
Network
Marcos father is Pierro. Who is Jamess father?
36
Future Work Metaphors We Live By
  • In Hintons model, neither domain is the base
    each influences the other equally
  • But research suggests that some domains serve as
    a base that influences other domains
  • Lakoff physical structure as a base for the
    structure of an intellectual argument
  • Boroditsky space as a base for time
  • In connectionist networks, primacy and frequency
    both influence performance
  • This allows the models to simulate how early and
    pervasive experience may allow one domain to
    serve as the base for others experienced later or
    less frequently
  • Influences can still run in both directions, but
    to different extents

37
Emergence of Meaning and Metaphor
  • Learned distributed representations that capture
    important aspects of meaning emerge through a
    gradual learning process in simple connectionist
    networks
  • Metaphor arises naturally as a byproduct of
    learning information in homologous domains in
    models of this type
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com