CURI: A Benchmark for Productive Concept Learning Under Uncertainty

Humans can learn and reason under substantial uncertainty in a space of infinitely many concepts, including structured relational concepts ("a scene with objects that have the same color") and ad-hoc categories defined through goals ("objects that could fall on one's head"). In contrast, standard classification benchmarks: 1) consider only a fixed set of category labels, 2) do not evaluate compositional concept learning and 3) do not explicitly capture a notion of reasoning under uncertainty. We introduce a new few-shot, meta-learning benchmark, Compositional Reasoning Under Uncertainty (CURI) to bridge this gap. CURI evaluates different aspects of productive and systematic generalization, including abstract understandings of disentangling, productive generalization, learning boolean operations, variable binding, etc. Importantly, it also defines a model-independent "compositionality gap" to evaluate the difficulty of generalizing out-of-distribution along each of these axes. Extensive evaluations across a range of modeling choices spanning different modalities (image, schemas, and sounds), splits, privileged auxiliary concept information, and choices of negatives reveal substantial scope for modeling advances on the proposed task. All code and datasets will be available online.

[1]  Jacob Feldman,et al.  Minimization of Boolean complexity in human concept learning , 2000, Nature.

[2]  Noah D. Goodman Learning and the language of thought , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCV Workshops).

[3]  A Benchmark for Systematic Generalization in Grounded Language Understanding , 2020, NeurIPS.

[4]  Jürgen Schmidhuber,et al.  Long Short-Term Memory , 1997, Neural Computation.

[5]  Ross B. Girshick,et al.  PHYRE: A New Benchmark for Physical Reasoning , 2019, NeurIPS.

[6]  Ramprasaath R. Selvaraju,et al.  Counting Everyday Objects in Everyday Scenes , 2016, 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[7]  Li Fei-Fei,et al.  CLEVR: A Diagnostic Dataset for Compositional Language and Elementary Visual Reasoning , 2016, 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[8]  Dhruv Batra,et al.  Don't Just Assume; Look and Answer: Overcoming Priors for Visual Question Answering , 2017, 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[9]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  The logical primitives of thought: Empirical foundations for compositional cognitive models. , 2016, Psychological review.

[10]  L. Barsalou,et al.  Ad hoc categories , 1983, Memory & cognition.

[11]  G. Murphy,et al.  The Big Book of Concepts , 2002 .

[12]  Joshua B. Tenenbaum,et al.  The Omniglot challenge: a 3-year progress report , 2019, Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences.

[13]  Tong Zhang,et al.  Supervised and Semi-Supervised Text Categorization using LSTM for Region Embeddings , 2016, ICML.

[14]  Richard S. Zemel,et al.  Prototypical Networks for Few-shot Learning , 2017, NIPS.

[15]  Tom Griffiths,et al.  Learning deep taxonomic priors for concept learning from few positive examples , 2019, CogSci.

[16]  Razvan Pascanu,et al.  A simple neural network module for relational reasoning , 2017, NIPS.

[17]  Brenden M. Lake,et al.  Compositional generalization through meta sequence-to-sequence learning , 2019, NeurIPS.

[18]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks , 2010, AISTATS.

[19]  Pietro Perona,et al.  One-shot learning of object categories , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[20]  Felix Hill,et al.  Learning to Make Analogies by Contrasting Abstract Relational Structure , 2019, ICLR.

[21]  Zenon W. Pylyshyn,et al.  Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis , 1988, Cognition.

[22]  Hugo Larochelle,et al.  Optimization as a Model for Few-Shot Learning , 2016, ICLR.

[23]  Christoph H. Lampert,et al.  Attribute-Based Classification for Zero-Shot Visual Object Categorization , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[24]  Marco Baroni,et al.  Generalization without Systematicity: On the Compositional Skills of Sequence-to-Sequence Recurrent Networks , 2017, ICML.

[25]  Lukasz Kaiser,et al.  Attention is All you Need , 2017, NIPS.

[26]  Dan Klein,et al.  Learning with Latent Language , 2017, NAACL.

[27]  Oriol Vinyals,et al.  Matching Networks for One Shot Learning , 2016, NIPS.

[28]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  CLOSURE: Assessing Systematic Generalization of CLEVR Models , 2019, ViGIL@NeurIPS.

[29]  Luc Van Gool,et al.  The Pascal Visual Object Classes (VOC) Challenge , 2010, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[30]  Hugo Larochelle,et al.  Meta-Dataset: A Dataset of Datasets for Learning to Learn from Few Examples , 2019, ICLR.

[31]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  Bootstrapping in a language of thought: A formal model of numerical concept learning , 2012, Cognition.

[32]  Xiao Wang,et al.  Measuring Compositional Generalization: A Comprehensive Method on Realistic Data , 2019, ICLR.

[33]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  Concepts in a Probabilistic Language of Thought , 2014 .

[34]  Steve Piantadosi,et al.  People Infer Recursive Visual Concepts from Just a Few Examples , 2019, Computational Brain & Behavior.

[35]  Pietro Liò,et al.  Abstract Diagrammatic Reasoning with Multiplex Graph Networks , 2020, ICLR.

[36]  Kevin P. Murphy,et al.  Machine learning - a probabilistic perspective , 2012, Adaptive computation and machine learning series.

[37]  D. McDermott LANGUAGE OF THOUGHT , 2012 .

[38]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  A Rational Analysis of Rule-Based Concept Learning , 2008, Cogn. Sci..

[39]  Demis Hassabis,et al.  SCAN: Learning Abstract Hierarchical Compositional Visual Concepts , 2017, ArXiv.

[40]  R. Jacobs,et al.  Learning abstract visual concepts via probabilistic program induction in a Language of Thought , 2017, Cognition.

[41]  Sergey Levine,et al.  Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning for Fast Adaptation of Deep Networks , 2017, ICML.

[42]  Joshua B. Tenenbaum,et al.  A Generative Theory of Similarity , 2005 .

[43]  Charles Kemp,et al.  Abstraction and Relational learning , 2009, NIPS.

[44]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Word learning as Bayesian inference. , 2007, Psychological review.

[45]  John K Kruschke,et al.  Bayesian data analysis. , 2010, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[46]  Kevin Murphy,et al.  Generative Models of Visually Grounded Imagination , 2017, ICLR.

[47]  Felix Hill,et al.  Measuring abstract reasoning in neural networks , 2018, ICML.

[48]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Generalization, similarity, and Bayesian inference. , 2001, The Behavioral and brain sciences.