Predicting transfer performance: a comparison of competing function learning models.

The population of linear experts (POLE) model suggests that function learning and transfer are mediated by activation of a set of prestored linear functions that together approximate the given function (Kalish, Lewandowsky, & Kruschke, 2004). In the extrapolation-association (EXAM) model, an exemplar-based architecture associates trained input values with their paired output values. Transfer incorporates a linear rule-based response mechanism (McDaniel & Busemeyer, 2005). Learners were trained on a functional relationship defined by 2 linear-function segments with mirror slopes. In Experiment 1, 1 segment was densely trained and 1 was sparsely trained; in Experiment 2, both segments were trained equally, but the 2 segments were widely separated. Transfer to new input values was tested. For each model, training performance for each individual participant was fit, and transfer predictions were generated. POLE generally better fit the training data than did EXAM, but EXAM was more accurate at predicting (and fitting) transfer behaviors. It was especially telling that in Experiment 2 the transfer pattern was more consistent with EXAM's but not POLE's predictions, even though the presentation of salient linear segments during training dovetailed with POLE's approach.

[1]  J. Carroll FUNCTIONAL LEARNING: THE LEARNING OF CONTINUOUS FUNCTIONAL MAPPINGS RELATING STIMULUS AND RESPONSE CONTINUA , 1963 .

[2]  T. Trabasso Attention in learning , 1968 .

[3]  B. Brehmer,et al.  Effects of function form and cue validity on the subjects' hypotheses in probabilistic inference tasks , 1974 .

[4]  B. Brehmer Hypotheses about relations between scaled variables in the learning of probabilistic inference tasks , 1974 .

[5]  W. A. Wagenaar,et al.  Misperception of exponential growth , 1975 .

[6]  D. Meyer,et al.  Function learning: induction of continuous stimulus-response relations. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[7]  J. Kruschke,et al.  ALCOVE: an exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning. , 1992, Psychological review.

[8]  K. Koh Induction of combination rules in two-dimensional function learning , 1993, Memory & cognition.

[9]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  Rule-plus-exception model of classification learning. , 1994, Psychological review.

[10]  Eunhee Byun,et al.  Interaction between prior knowledge and type of nonlinear relationship on function learning , 1995 .

[11]  M. McDaniel,et al.  The Abstraction of Intervening Concepts from Experience with Multiple Input–Multiple Output Causal Environments , 1997, Cognitive Psychology.

[12]  M. McDaniel,et al.  Extrapolation: the sine qua non for abstraction in function learning. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[13]  Gregory Ashby,et al.  A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning. , 1998, Psychological review.

[14]  Koen Lamberts,et al.  Knowledge, Concepts, and Categories , 1997 .

[15]  J. Kruschke,et al.  Rules and exemplars in category learning. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[16]  D. Medin,et al.  Concepts do more than categorize , 1999, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[17]  Wasserman,et al.  Bayesian Model Selection and Model Averaging. , 2000, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[18]  J. Busemeyer,et al.  Model Comparisons and Model Selections Based on Generalization Criterion Methodology. , 2000, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[19]  Mark K. Johansen,et al.  Exemplar-based accounts of "multiple-system" phenomena in perceptual categorization. , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[20]  J. Kruschke,et al.  Rule-based extrapolation in perceptual categorization , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[21]  M. Kalish,et al.  Simplified learning in complex situations: knowledge partitioning in function learning. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[22]  I. J. Myung,et al.  Tutorial on maximum likelihood estimation , 2003 .

[23]  P. Juslin,et al.  Exemplar effects in categorization and multiple-cue judgment. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[24]  Stephan Lewandowsky,et al.  Population of linear experts: knowledge partitioning and function learning. , 2004, Psychological review.

[25]  J. Busemeyer,et al.  Learning Functional Relations Based on Experience With Input-Output Pairs by Humans and Artificial Neural Networks , 2005 .

[26]  M. McDaniel,et al.  The conceptual basis of function learning and extrapolation: Comparison of rule-based and associative-based models , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[27]  A. Neal,et al.  Why people underestimate y when extrapolating in linear functions. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[28]  John K. Kruschke,et al.  Learning of rules that have high-frequency exceptions: New empirical data and a hybrid connectionist model , 2019, Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.