Cogprints

The adaptive advantage of symbolic theft over sensorimotor toil: Grounding language in perceptual categories

Cangelosi, Angelo and Harnad, Stevan (2001) The adaptive advantage of symbolic theft over sensorimotor toil: Grounding language in perceptual categories. [Journal (Paginated)]

Full text available as:

[img] HTML
132Kb
[img] PDF
182Kb

Abstract

Using neural nets to simulate learning and the genetic algorithm to simulate evolution in a toy world of mushrooms and mushroom-foragers, we place two ways of acquiring categories into direct competition with one another: In (1) "sensorimotor toil,” new categories are acquired through real-time, feedback-corrected, trial and error experience in sorting them. In (2) "symbolic theft,” new categories are acquired by hearsay from propositions – boolean combinations of symbols describing them. In competition, symbolic theft always beats sensorimotor toil. We hypothesize that this is the basis of the adaptive advantage of language. Entry-level categories must still be learned by toil, however, to avoid an infinite regress (the “symbol grounding problem”). Changes in the internal representations of categories must take place during the course of learning by toil. These changes can be analyzed in terms of the compression of within-category similarities and the expansion of between-category differences. These allow regions of similarity space to be separated, bounded and named, and then the names can be combined and recombined to describe new categories, grounded recursively in the old ones. Such compression/expansion effects, called "categorical perception" (CP), have previously been reported with categories acquired by sensorimotor toil; we show that they can also arise from symbolic theft alone. The picture of natural language and its origins that emerges from this analysis is that of a powerful hybrid symbolic/sensorimotor capacity, infinitely superior to its purely sensorimotor precursors, but still grounded in and dependent on them. It can spare us from untold time and effort learning things the hard way, through direct experience, but it remain anchored in and translatable into the language of experience.

Item Type:Journal (Paginated)
Keywords:language evolution, symbol grounding, categorical perception, neural networks, artificial life
Subjects:Linguistics > Computational Linguistics
Biology > Evolution
Psychology > Cognitive Psychology
Computer Science > Neural Nets
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
Psychology > Evolutionary Psychology
ID Code:2036
Deposited By: Cangelosi, Professor Angelo
Deposited On:16 Jan 2002
Last Modified:11 Mar 2011 08:54

References in Article

Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.

Andrews, J., K. Livingston, and S. Harnad. 1998. Categorical perception effects induced by category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Cognition. 24(3): 732-53

Cangelosi, A. 2001. Evolution of communication and language using signals, symbols and words. IEEE Transactions in Evolutionary Computation, 5(2): 93-101

Cangelosi, A., A. Greco, and S. Harnad. 2000. From robotic toil to symbolic theft: Grounding transfer from entry-level to higher-level categories. Connection Science, 12: 143-162

Cangelosi, A., and D. Parisi. 1998. The emergence of a "language" in an evolving population of neural networks. Connection Science, 10: 83-97

Cangelosi, A. and D. Parisi. 2002. Simulating the evolution of language. London: Springer-Verlag

Catania, A.C. and S. Harnad. (Eds.). 1988. The selection of behavior. The operant behaviorism of BF Skinner: Comments and consequences. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Csato, L., G. Kovacs, S. Harnad, R. Pevtzow, and A. Lorincz. Submitted. Category learning, categorization difficulty, and categorical perception: Computational and behavioral evidence. Connection Science.

Gibson, J.J. 1979. An ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin

Goldberg, D.E. 1989. Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Goldstone, R. 1994. Influences of categorization on perceptual discrimination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123:178-200

Goldstone, R.L., M. Steyvers, M., and K. Larimer. 1996. Categorical perception of novel dimensions. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.

Harnad, S. 1976. Induction, evolution and accountability. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 280: 58-60.

Harnad, S. (Ed.) 1987. Categorical Perception: The groundwork of cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Harnad, S. 1990. The Symbol Grounding Problem. Physica D 42: 335-346.

Harnad, S. 1992. Connecting Object to Symbol in Modeling Cognition. In A. Clark and R. Lutz (Eds.) Connectionism in context Springer Verlag, pp 75 - 90.

Harnad, S. 1993. Grounding symbols in the analog world with neural nets. Think 2(1): 12-78 (Special issue on "Connectionism versus Symbolism," D.M.W. Powers & P.A. Flach, eds.).

Harnad, S. 1995. Grounding symbolic capacity in robotic capacity. In L. Steels, and R. Brooks (Eds.) The Artificial Life route to Artificial Intelligence: Building embodied situated Agents. New Haven: Lawrence Erlbaum. pp. 277-286.

Harnad, S. 1996a. The origin of words: A psychophysical hypothesis In B. Velichkovsky B and D. Rumbaugh (Eds.) Communicating Meaning: Evolution and Development of Language. NJ: Erlbaum: pp 27-44.

Harnad, S. 1996b. Experimental analysis of naming behavior cannot explain naming capacity. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 65: 262-264.

Harnad, S., S.J. Hanson and J. Lubin. 1991. Categorical Perception and the evolution of supervised learning in neural nets. In DW Powers & L Reeker (Eds.), Working Papers of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Machine Learning of Natural Language and Ontology. pp. 65-74.

Harnad, S., S.J. Hanson and J. Lubin. 1995. Learned categorical perception in neural nets: Implications for symbol grounding. In V. Honavar & L. Uhr (Eds.) Symbol processors and connectionist Network models in artificial intelligence and cognitive modelling steps toward principled integration. Academic Press. pp. 191-206.

Harnad, S., H.D. Steklis and J.B Lancaster. (Eds.) 1976. Origins and evolution of language and speech. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 280.

Kirby, S. 2000. Syntax without natural selection: How compositionality emerges from vocabulary in a population of learners. In C. Knight, M. Studdert-Kennedy, J.R. Hurford (eds), The evolutionary emergence of language: Social function and the origins of linguistic form, Cambridge University Press, pp 303-323

Knight, C., M. Studdert-Kennedy, and J.R. Hurfor. 2000. The evolutionary emergence of language: Social function and the origins of linguistic form, Cambridge University Press

Livingston, K.R. and J.K. Andrews. 1995. On the interaction of prior knowledge and stimulus structure in category learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A-Human Experimental Psychology, 48: 208-236.

Nakisa, R.C., and K. Plunkett. 1998 Evolution of a rapidly learned representation for speech. Language and Cognitive Processes, 13: 105-127

Parisi, D., F. Cecconi, and S. Nolfi. 1990. Econets: neural networks that learn in an environment. Network, 1:149-168.

Pevtzow, R. and S. Harnad. 1997. Warping similarity space in category learning by human subjects: The role of task difficulty. In M. Ramscar, U. Hahn, E. Cambouropolos and H. Pain (Eds.), Proceedings of SimCat 1997: Interdisciplinary Workshop on Similarity and Categorization. Department of Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh University, pp.189-195.

Rumelhart, D.E, G.E. Hinton G.E. and R.J. Williams. 1986. Learning internal representations by error propagation. In D.E. Rumelhart and J.L McClelland (Eds.), Parallel Distributed Processing: Exploration in the microstructure of cognition, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, vol. 1

Steels, L. 1997. The synthetic modeling of language origins, Evolution of Communication, 1: 1-34.

Steels, L. 2002. Grounding symbols through evolutionary language games. In A. Cangelosi & D. Parisi, Simulating the evolution of language. London: Springer-Verlag

Steels, L., and F. Kaplan 1999. Collective learning and semiotic dynamics. In D. Floreano et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of ECAL99 European Conference on Artificial Life, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 679-688

Steklis, H.D. and S. Harnad. 1976. From hand to mouth: Some critical stages in the evolution of language. In: S. Harnad et al. 1976, pp. 445-455.

Tijsseling, A. and S. Harnad. 1997. Warping similarity space in category learning by backprop nets. In M. Ramscar, U. Hahn, E. Cambouropolos and H. Pain (Eds.), Proceedings of SimCat 1997: Interdisciplinary Workshop on Similarity and Categorization. Department of Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh University, pp.263-269.

Whorf, B.L. 1964. Language, thought and reality. Cambridge MA: MIT Press

Metadata

Repository Staff Only: item control page

Cogprints is powered by EPrints 3 which is developed by the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. More information and software credits.