Why is scaling up models of language evolution hard?

Computational model simulations have been very fruitful for gaining insight into how the systematic structure we observe in the world’s natural languages could have emerged through cultural evolution. However, these model simulations operate on a toy scale compared to the size of actual human vocabularies, due to the prohibitive computational resource demands that simulations with larger lexicons would pose. Using computational complexity analysis, we show that this is not an implementational artifact, but instead it reflects a deeper theoretical issue: these models are (in their current formulation) computationally intractable. This has important theoretical implications, because it means that there is no way of knowing whether or not the properties and regularities observed for the toy models would scale up. All is not lost however, because awareness of intractability allows us to face the issue of scaling head-on, and can guide the development of our theories.

[1]  Marcello Frixione,et al.  Tractable Competence , 2001, Minds and Machines.

[2]  John K. Tsotsos Analyzing vision at the complexity level , 1990, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[3]  L. Steels Evolving grounded communication for robots , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  Michael Franke,et al.  Coevolution of Lexical Meaning and Pragmatic Use , 2018, Cogn. Sci..

[5]  Lance Fortnow,et al.  The status of the P versus NP problem , 2009, CACM.

[6]  Scott Aaronson,et al.  NP-complete Problems and Physical Reality , 2005, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[7]  David Maxwell Chickering,et al.  Learning Bayesian Networks is , 1994 .

[8]  Kenny Smith,et al.  A computational model of the cultural co-evolution of language and mindreading , 2019, Synthese.

[9]  S. Kirby,et al.  Iterated learning and the evolution of language , 2014, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[10]  M. Tamariz Experimental Studies on the Cultural Evolution of Language , 2017 .

[11]  Johan Kwisthout,et al.  Intentional Communication: Computationally Easy or Difficult? , 2011, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[12]  Johan Kwisthout,et al.  Rational analysis, intractability, and the prospects of ‘as if’-explanations , 2014, Synthese.

[13]  Dale J. Barr,et al.  Establishing conventional communication systems: Is common knowledge necessary? , 2004, Cogn. Sci..

[14]  Patricia A. Evans,et al.  Identifying Sources of Intractability in Cognitive Models: An Illustration Using Analogical Structure Mapping , 2008 .

[15]  Mark Blokpoel,et al.  Recipient design in human communication: simple heuristics or perspective taking? , 2012, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[16]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  Language Evolution by Iterated Learning With Bayesian Agents , 2007, Cogn. Sci..

[17]  M. Nowak,et al.  The evolutionary language game. , 1999, Journal of theoretical biology.

[18]  Iris van Rooij,et al.  How Intractability Spans the Cognitive and Evolutionary Levels of Explanation , 2020, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[19]  S. Kirby Culture and biology in the origins of linguistic structure , 2017, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[20]  Johan Kwisthout,et al.  Cognition and intractability: a guide to classical and parameterized complexity analysis , 2019 .

[21]  Ashraf M. Abdelbar,et al.  Approximating MAPs for Belief Networks is NP-Hard and Other Theorems , 1998, Artif. Intell..

[22]  R. Weale Vision. A Computational Investigation Into the Human Representation and Processing of Visual Information. David Marr , 1983 .

[23]  Andrew D M Smith,et al.  Models of language evolution and change. , 2014, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[24]  S. Kirby,et al.  Culture shapes the evolution of cognition , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[25]  Kenny Smith,et al.  How Culture and Biology Interact to Shape Language and the Language Faculty , 2018, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[26]  S. Kirby,et al.  The cultural evolution of language. , 2016, Current opinion in psychology.

[27]  Nick Chater,et al.  The Rational Analysis Of Mind And Behavior , 2000, Synthese.

[28]  Simon Kirby,et al.  Spontaneous evolution of linguistic structure-an iterated learning model of the emergence of regularity and irregularity , 2001, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[29]  Falk Lieder,et al.  Resource-rational analysis: Understanding human cognition as the optimal use of limited computational resources , 2019, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[30]  Solomon Eyal Shimony,et al.  Finding MAPs for Belief Networks is NP-Hard , 1994, Artif. Intell..

[31]  Johan Kwisthout,et al.  Bayesian Intractability Is Not an Ailment That Approximation Can Cure , 2011, Cogn. Sci..

[32]  S. Kirby,et al.  Compression and communication in the cultural evolution of linguistic structure , 2015, Cognition.

[33]  G. Box Science and Statistics , 1976 .

[34]  Mark Dingemanse,et al.  A simple repair mechanism can alleviate computational demands of pragmatic reasoning: simulations and complexity analysis , 2020, CoNLL.

[35]  Sanjeev Arora,et al.  Computational Complexity: A Modern Approach , 2009 .