The discovery of structural form

Algorithms for finding structure in data have become increasingly important both as tools for scientific data analysis and as models of human learning, yet they suffer from a critical limitation. Scientists discover qualitatively new forms of structure in observed data: For instance, Linnaeus recognized the hierarchical organization of biological species, and Mendeleev recognized the periodic structure of the chemical elements. Analogous insights play a pivotal role in cognitive development: Children discover that object category labels can be organized into hierarchies, friendship networks are organized into cliques, and comparative relations (e.g., “bigger than” or “better than”) respect a transitive order. Standard algorithms, however, can only learn structures of a single form that must be specified in advance: For instance, algorithms for hierarchical clustering create tree structures, whereas algorithms for dimensionality-reduction create low-dimensional spaces. Here, we present a computational model that learns structures of many different forms and that discovers which form is best for a given dataset. The model makes probabilistic inferences over a space of graph grammars representing trees, linear orders, multidimensional spaces, rings, dominance hierarchies, cliques, and other forms and successfully discovers the underlying structure of a variety of physical, biological, and social domains. Our approach brings structure learning methods closer to human abilities and may lead to a deeper computational understanding of cognitive development.

[1]  Clyde Wilcox,et al.  The Dimensionality of Roll-Call Voting Reconsidered , 1991 .

[2]  Thomas R. Schultz,et al.  A Connectionist Model of the Development of Transitivity , 2004 .

[3]  R. A. Bradley,et al.  RANK ANALYSIS OF INCOMPLETE BLOCK DESIGNS , 1952 .

[4]  Zoubin Ghahramani,et al.  Semi-supervised learning : from Gaussian fields to Gaussian processes , 2003 .

[5]  Shigeo Abe DrEng Pattern Classification , 2001, Springer London.

[6]  Drew McDermott,et al.  A critique of pure reason 1 , 1987, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[7]  Wm. R. Wright General Intelligence, Objectively Determined and Measured. , 1905 .

[8]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The Adaptive Nature of Human Categorization , 1991 .

[9]  Friederike Range,et al.  Familiarity and dominance relations among female sooty mangabeys in the Taï National Park , 2002, American journal of primatology.

[10]  서울대학교 철학사상연구소,et al.  Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolution , 2004 .

[11]  Sean Nee,et al.  The great chain of being , 2005, Nature.

[12]  Michael I. Jordan Learning in Graphical Models , 1999, NATO ASI Series.

[13]  R. Rescorla,et al.  A theory of Pavlovian conditioning : Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement , 1972 .

[14]  J. Piaget The Child's Conception of Number , 1953 .

[15]  M. Leyton Symmetry, Causality, Mind , 1999 .

[16]  Joost Engelfriet,et al.  Node Replacement Graph Grammars , 1997, Handbook of Graph Grammars.

[17]  E. Rosch,et al.  Cognition and Categorization , 1980 .

[18]  Susan Carey,et al.  Acquiring a Single New Word , 1978 .

[19]  M. V. Velzen,et al.  Self-organizing maps , 2007 .

[20]  L. Guttman A basis for scaling qualitative data. , 1944 .

[21]  Karl Pearson F.R.S. LIII. On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space , 1901 .

[22]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  वाक्यविन्यास का सैद्धान्तिक पक्ष = Aspects of the theory of syntax , 1965 .

[23]  Peter H. A. Sneath,et al.  Numerical Taxonomy: The Principles and Practice of Numerical Classification , 1973 .

[24]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Theory-based Bayesian models of inductive learning and reasoning , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[25]  A. Fiske The four elementary forms of sociality: framework for a unified theory of social relations. , 1992, Psychological review.

[26]  R N Shepard,et al.  Multidimensional Scaling, Tree-Fitting, and Clustering , 1980, Science.

[27]  F. Keil Constraints on knowledge and cognitive development. , 1981 .

[28]  Elie Bienenstock,et al.  Neural Networks and the Bias/Variance Dilemma , 1992, Neural Computation.

[29]  E. Trucco,et al.  Mathematical thinking in the social sciences , 1955 .

[30]  W. Torgerson,et al.  Multidimensional scaling of similarity , 1965, Psychometrika.

[31]  John P. Huelsenbeck,et al.  MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees , 2001, Bioinform..

[32]  Manfred Nagl Set theoretic approaches to graph grammars , 1986, Graph-Grammars and Their Application to Computer Science.

[33]  W. Whewell The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences: Founded Upon Their History , 2010 .

[34]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[35]  F. Harary,et al.  Exchange in Oceania: A Graph Theoretic Analysis , 1991 .

[36]  J. Fleishman,et al.  Types of Political Attitude Structure: Results of a Cluster Analysis , 1986 .

[37]  R. A. Bradley,et al.  Rank Analysis of Incomplete Block Designs: I. The Method of Paired Comparisons , 1952 .

[38]  D. H. Wheeler,et al.  The early growth of logic in the child : classification and seriation , 1965 .

[39]  M. Ross Quillian,et al.  Retrieval time from semantic memory , 1969 .

[40]  J. S. Wiggins,et al.  An informal history of the interpersonal circumplex tradition. , 1996, Journal of personality assessment.

[41]  William Whewell,et al.  The philosophy of the inductive sciences , 1847 .

[42]  Laura R. Novick,et al.  To Matrix, Network, or Hierarchy: That Is the Question , 2001, Cognitive Psychology.

[43]  Tom Burr,et al.  Causation, Prediction, and Search , 2003, Technometrics.

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

[45]  T. Shultz Computational Developmental Psychology , 2003 .

[46]  David Zipser,et al.  Feature Discovery by Competive Learning , 1986, Cogn. Sci..

[47]  S. Carey Conceptual Change in Childhood , 1985 .

[48]  W. K. Purves Life: The Science of Biology , 1985 .

[49]  M E J Newman,et al.  Community structure in social and biological networks , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[50]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern Classification , 1973 .

[51]  J. Carroll,et al.  Spatial, non-spatial and hybrid models for scaling , 1976 .

[52]  D. Sperber Are folk taxonomies “memes”? , 1998, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[53]  G. Ekman Dimensions of Color Vision , 1954 .

[54]  B. Malinowski Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An Account of Native Enterprise and Adventure in the Archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea , 2002 .

[55]  W. F. Prokasy,et al.  Classical conditioning II: Current research and theory. , 1972 .

[56]  Eleanor Rosch,et al.  Principles of Categorization , 1978 .

[57]  M. Tribus,et al.  Probability theory: the logic of science , 2003 .

[58]  L. Williams,et al.  Contents , 2020, Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.).

[59]  Duncan MacRae join,et al.  Direct Factor Analysis of Sociometric Data , 1960 .

[60]  R. A. Bradley,et al.  RANK ANALYSIS OF INCOMPLETE BLOCK DESIGNS THE METHOD OF PAIRED COMPARISONS , 1952 .

[61]  R. Horton Rules and representations , 1993, The Lancet.

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

[63]  Bernard Grofman,et al.  Identifying the Median Justice on the Supreme Court through Multidimensional Scaling: Analysis of “Natural Courts” 1953–1991 , 2002 .

[64]  A. Gopnik,et al.  Words, thoughts, and theories , 1997 .

[65]  A. C. Haddon Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An Account of Native Enterprise and Adventure in the Archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea , 1922, Nature.