Transforming task representations to perform novel tasks

Significance An intelligent system should be able to adapt to a novel task without any data and achieve at least moderate success. Humans can often do so, while models often require immense datasets to reach human-level performance. We propose a general computational framework by which models can adapt to new tasks based only on their relationship to old tasks. Our approach is based on transforming learned task representations. Our approach allows models to perform well on novel tasks, even using novel relationships not encountered during training. This adaptation can substantially accelerate later learning. Our work could contribute to understanding the computational basis of intelligence, to cognitive modeling, and to building more flexible forms of artificial intelligence. An important aspect of intelligence is the ability to adapt to a novel task without any direct experience (zero shot), based on its relationship to previous tasks. Humans can exhibit this cognitive flexibility. By contrast, models that achieve superhuman performance in specific tasks often fail to adapt to even slight task alterations. To address this, we propose a general computational framework for adapting to novel tasks based on their relationship to prior tasks. We begin by learning vector representations of tasks. To adapt to new tasks, we propose metamappings, higher-order tasks that transform basic task representations. We demonstrate the effectiveness of this framework across a wide variety of tasks and computational paradigms, ranging from regression to image classification and reinforcement learning. We compare to both human adaptability and language-based approaches to zero-shot learning. Across these domains, metamapping is successful, often achieving 80 to 90% performance, without any data, on a novel task, even when the new task directly contradicts prior experience. We further show that metamapping can not only generalize to new tasks via learned relationships, but can also generalize using novel relationships unseen during training. Finally, using metamapping as a starting point can dramatically accelerate later learning on a new task and reduce learning time and cumulative error substantially. Our results provide insight into a possible computational basis of intelligent adaptability and offer a possible framework for modeling cognitive flexibility and building more flexible artificial intelligence systems.

[1]  Andrew Kyle Lampinen A computational framework for learning and transforming task representations , 2021 .

[2]  Andrew Kyle Lampinen,et al.  What shapes feature representations? Exploring datasets, architectures, and training , 2020, NeurIPS.

[3]  Zeb Kurth-Nelson,et al.  A distributional code for value in dopamine-based reinforcement learning , 2020, Nature.

[4]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  Shaping Visual Representations with Language for Few-Shot Classification , 2019, ACL.

[5]  Benjamin F. Grewe,et al.  Continual learning with hypernetworks , 2019, ICLR.

[6]  Wojciech M. Czarnecki,et al.  Grandmaster level in StarCraft II using multi-agent reinforcement learning , 2019, Nature.

[7]  Colin Wei,et al.  Towards Explaining the Regularization Effect of Initial Large Learning Rate in Training Neural Networks , 2019, NeurIPS.

[8]  Feiyue Huang,et al.  LGM-Net: Learning to Generate Matching Networks for Few-Shot Learning , 2019, ICML.

[9]  Stefano Soatto,et al.  Few-Shot Learning With Embedded Class Models and Shot-Free Meta Training , 2019, 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).

[10]  Vineeth N. Balasubramanian,et al.  Zero-Shot Task Transfer , 2019, 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[11]  Subhransu Maji,et al.  Task2Vec: Task Embedding for Meta-Learning , 2019, 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).

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

[13]  Sergey Levine,et al.  Unsupervised Learning via Meta-Learning , 2018, ICLR.

[14]  Razvan Pascanu,et al.  Meta-Learning with Latent Embedding Optimization , 2018, ICLR.

[15]  Sergey Levine,et al.  Diversity is All You Need: Learning Skills without a Reward Function , 2018, ICLR.

[16]  Christoph H. Lampert,et al.  Zero-Shot Learning—A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[17]  Yee Whye Teh,et al.  Conditional Neural Processes , 2018, ICML.

[18]  Andrew K. Lampinen,et al.  Different Presentations of a Mathematical Concept Can Support Learning in Complementary Ways , 2018, Journal of Educational Psychology.

[19]  Gary Marcus,et al.  Deep Learning: A Critical Appraisal , 2018, ArXiv.

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

[21]  Anthony C. Robinson,et al.  Reflections on ‘ColorBrewer.org: An Online Tool for Selecting Colour Schemes for Maps’ , 2017 .

[22]  James L McClelland,et al.  Building on prior knowledge without building it in. , 2017, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[23]  Andrew K. Lampinen,et al.  One-shot and few-shot learning of word embeddings , 2017, ArXiv.

[24]  Demis Hassabis,et al.  Grounded Language Learning in a Simulated 3D World , 2017, ArXiv.

[25]  Honglak Lee,et al.  Zero-Shot Task Generalization with Multi-Task Deep Reinforcement Learning , 2017, ICML.

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

[27]  Romain Laroche,et al.  Transfer Reinforcement Learning with Shared Dynamics , 2017, AAAI.

[28]  Sergio Gomez Colmenarejo,et al.  Hybrid computing using a neural network with dynamic external memory , 2016, Nature.

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

[30]  Andreas Krause,et al.  Safe Exploration in Finite Markov Decision Processes with Gaussian Processes , 2016, NIPS.

[31]  Joshua B. Tenenbaum,et al.  Building machines that learn and think like people , 2016, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[32]  Tim Salimans,et al.  Weight Normalization: A Simple Reparameterization to Accelerate Training of Deep Neural Networks , 2016, NIPS.

[33]  Demis Hassabis,et al.  Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search , 2016, Nature.

[34]  Nando de Freitas,et al.  Neural Programmer-Interpreters , 2015, ICLR.

[35]  Tianqi Chen,et al.  Empirical Evaluation of Rectified Activations in Convolutional Network , 2015, ArXiv.

[36]  Shane Legg,et al.  Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning , 2015, Nature.

[37]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Interactive Activation and Mutual Constraint Satisfaction in Perception and Cognition , 2014, Cogn. Sci..

[38]  Surya Ganguli,et al.  Exact solutions to the nonlinear dynamics of learning in deep linear neural networks , 2013, ICLR.

[39]  Hava T Siegelmann,et al.  Turing on Super-Turing and adaptivity. , 2013, Progress in biophysics and molecular biology.

[40]  Geoffrey Zweig,et al.  Linguistic Regularities in Continuous Space Word Representations , 2013, NAACL.

[41]  Andrew Y. Ng,et al.  Zero-Shot Learning Through Cross-Modal Transfer , 2013, NIPS.

[42]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Letting structure emerge: connectionist and dynamical systems approaches to cognition , 2010, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[44]  Y. Niv Reinforcement learning in the brain , 2009 .

[45]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Zero-data Learning of New Tasks , 2008, AAAI.

[46]  J. Fodor Lot 2: The Language of Thought Revisited , 2008 .

[47]  B. Baars Global workspace theory of consciousness: toward a cognitive neuroscience of human experience. , 2005, Progress in brain research.

[48]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Semantic Cognition: A Parallel Distributed Processing Approach , 2004 .

[49]  G. Vigliocco,et al.  Language in mind , 2004 .

[50]  Cynthia A. Brewer,et al.  ColorBrewer.org: An Online Tool for Selecting Colour Schemes for Maps , 2003 .

[51]  Jerry A. Fodor,et al.  Language, Thought and Compositionality , 2001, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement.

[52]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Automaticity , Attention and the Strength of Processing : A Parallel Distributed Processing Account of the Stroop Effect , 2001 .

[53]  S. Goldin-Meadow,et al.  The role of gesture in communication and thinking , 1999, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[54]  Orit Hazzan,et al.  Reducing Abstraction Level When Learning Abstract Algebra Concepts , 1999 .

[55]  M. Chi,et al.  Eliciting Self‐Explanations Improves Understanding , 1994 .

[56]  A. Karmiloff-Smith,et al.  The cognizer's innards: A psychological and philosophical perspective on the development of thought. , 1993 .

[57]  Hava T. Siegelmann,et al.  On the computational power of neural nets , 1992, COLT '92.

[58]  U. Wilensky Abstract Meditations on the Concrete and Concrete Implications for Mathematics Education , 1991 .

[59]  James L. McClelland,et al.  On the control of automatic processes: a parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. , 1990, Psychological review.

[60]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  Context effects in lexical processing , 1987, Cognition.

[61]  Geoffrey E. Hinton Using fast weights to deblur old memories , 1987 .

[62]  A. Karmiloff-Smith From meta-processes to conscious access: Evidence from children's metalinguistic and repair data , 1986, Cognition.

[63]  James L. McClelland Putting Knowledge in its Place: A Scheme for Programming Parallel Processing Structures on the Fly , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[64]  J. Fodor The Modularity of mind. An essay on faculty psychology , 1986 .

[65]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Analogical problem solving , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[66]  L. E. Bourne Knowing and Using Concepts. , 1970 .

[67]  G. D. Logan Task Switching , 2022 .