Effectively Learning from Pedagogical Demonstrations

When observing others’ behavior, people use Theory of Mind to infer unobservable beliefs, desires, and intentions. And when showing what activity one is doing, people will modify their behavior in order to facilitate more accurate interpretation and learning by an observer. Here, we present a novel model of how demonstrators act and observers interpret demonstrations corresponding to different levels of recursive social reasoning (i.e. a cognitive hierarchy) grounded in Theory of Mind. Our model can explain how demonstrators show others how to perform a task and makes predictions about how sophisticated observers can reason about communicative intentions. Additionally, we report an experiment that tests (1) how well an observer can learn from demonstrations that were produced with the intent to communicate, and (2) how an observer’s interpretation of demonstrations influences their judgments.

[1]  F. Heider,et al.  An experimental study of apparent behavior , 1944 .

[2]  S. Brison.  The Intentional Stance , 1989 .

[3]  Z. Nadasdy,et al.  Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age , 1995, Cognition.

[4]  Leslie Pack Kaelbling,et al.  Planning and Acting in Partially Observable Stochastic Domains , 1998, Artif. Intell..

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

[6]  Richard S. Sutton,et al.  Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction , 1998, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks.

[7]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition , 2005, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[8]  G. Csibra,et al.  Natural pedagogy , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[9]  Chris L. Baker,et al.  Action understanding as inverse planning , 2009, Cognition.

[10]  Michael L. Littman,et al.  Using iterated reasoning to predict opponent strategies , 2011, AAMAS.

[11]  J. Henrich,et al.  The cultural niche: Why social learning is essential for human adaptation , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

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

[13]  Siddhartha S. Srinivasa,et al.  Legibility and predictability of robot motion , 2013, 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[14]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  The mentalistic basis of core social cognition: experiments in preverbal infants and a computational model. , 2013, Developmental science.

[15]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  A rational account of pedagogical reasoning: Teaching by, and learning from, examples , 2014, Cognitive Psychology.

[16]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  Why do you ask? Good questions provoke informative answers , 2015, CogSci.

[17]  Anca D. Dragan,et al.  Cooperative Inverse Reinforcement Learning , 2016, NIPS.

[18]  Ines Gloeckner,et al.  Relevance Communication And Cognition , 2016 .

[19]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  Faster Teaching via POMDP Planning , 2016, Cogn. Sci..

[20]  Jessica B. Hamrick,et al.  psiTurk: An open-source framework for conducting replicable behavioral experiments online , 2016, Behavior research methods.

[21]  Fiery Cushman,et al.  Showing versus doing: Teaching by demonstration , 2016, NIPS.