A Rate-Distortion view of human pragmatic reasoning

What computational principles underlie human pragmatic reasoning? A prominent approach to pragmatics is the Rational Speech Act (RSA) framework, which formulates pragmatic reasoning as probabilistic speakers and listeners recursively reasoning about each other. While RSA enjoys broad empirical support, it is not yet clear whether the dynamics of such recursive reasoning may be governed by a general optimization principle. Here, we present a novel analysis of the RSA framework that addresses this question. First, we show that RSA recursion implements an alternating maximization for optimizing a tradeoff between expected utility and communicative effort. On that basis, we study the dynamics of RSA recursion and disconfirm the conjecture that expected utility is guaranteed to improve with recursion depth. Second, we show that RSA can be grounded in Rate-Distortion theory, while maintaining a similar ability to account for human behavior and avoiding a bias of RSA toward random utterance production. This work furthers the mathematical understanding of RSA models, and suggests that general information-theoretic principles may give rise to human pragmatic reasoning.

[1]  Chris R Sims,et al.  Efficient coding explains the universal law of generalization in human perception , 2018, Science.

[2]  Yu Bai,et al.  Understanding the Rational Speech Act model , 2018, CogSci.

[3]  Colin Camerer,et al.  A Cognitive Hierarchy Model of Games , 2004 .

[4]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Learning to Reason Pragmatically with Cognitive Limitations , 2014, CogSci.

[5]  Michael C. Frank Rational speech act models of pragmatic reasoning in reference games , 2016 .

[6]  Gloria Origgi,et al.  A pragmatic perspective on the evolution of language , 2010 .

[7]  Michael Franke,et al.  Reasoning in Reference Games: Individual- vs. Population-Level Probabilistic Modeling , 2016, PloS one.

[8]  Patrick Shafto,et al.  A mathematical theory of cooperative communication , 2020, NeurIPS.

[9]  D. Sperber,et al.  Relevance: Communication and Cognition , 1997 .

[10]  Richard Futrell,et al.  Universals of word order reflect optimization of grammars for efficient communication , 2020, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  The interactions of rational, pragmatic agents lead to efficient language structure and use , 2019, CogSci.

[12]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Review Pragmatic Language Interpretation as Probabilistic Inference , 2022 .

[13]  C. E. SHANNON,et al.  A mathematical theory of communication , 1948, MOCO.

[14]  Imre Csiszár,et al.  Information Theory and Statistics: A Tutorial , 2004, Found. Trends Commun. Inf. Theory.

[15]  Roger Levy,et al.  Pragmatic reasoning through semantic inference , 2016, Semantics and Pragmatics.

[16]  Charles Kemp,et al.  Efficient compression in color naming and its evolution , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Predicting Pragmatic Reasoning in Language Games , 2012, Science.

[18]  C. Sims Rate–distortion theory and human perception , 2016, Cognition.

[19]  Roger Levy,et al.  Communicative Efficiency, Uniform Information Density, and the Rational Speech Act Theory , 2018, CogSci.