Discovering containment: from infants to machines

Rapid developments in the field of automated learning have caused a major shift in the approach to the learning of intelligent systems, from explicit instruction to the automatic learning from a large number of labeled examples. Yet, current methods cannot explain infants’ learning, in particular the ability to learn complex concepts without guidance, and the natural order of concepts acquisition. A notable example is the category of 'containers' and the notion of ‘containment’, one of the earliest spatial relations to be learned 1–5 , starting already at 2.5 months 2,5 , and preceding other common relations (e.g., ‘support’ 6 ). Such spontaneous unsupervised learning stands in contrast with current highly successful computational models, which learn in a supervised manner, using large data sets of labeled examples 7,8 . How can meaningful concepts be learned without guidance, and what determines the trajectory of infant learning, making some notions appear consistently earlier than others? We present a model, which explains infants’ capacity of learning the complex concept of ‘containment’ and related concepts by just looking, together with their empirical development trajectory. Learning occurs fast and without guidance, relying only on perceptual processes that are present in the first months of life. Instead of labeled training examples, the system provides its own internal supervision to guide the learning process. We show how the detection of so-called ‘paradoxical occlusion’ provides internal supervision, which guides the system to gradually acquire a range of useful ‘containment’related concepts. The mechanism of using internal implicit supervision is likely to have broad application in other cognitive domains as well as artificial intelligent systems, because it alleviates the need for supplying extensive external supervision, and it can guide the learning process to extract concepts that are meaningful to the observer, even if they are not by themselves obvious, or salient in the input.

[1]  A Yonas,et al.  Infants’ sensitivity to kinetic information for three-dimensional object shape , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[2]  Michael J. Black,et al.  A Fully-Connected Layered Model of Foreground and Background Flow , 2013, 2013 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[3]  Marianella Casasola,et al.  Learning to form a spatial category of tight-fit relations: how experience with a label can give a boost. , 2009, Developmental psychology.

[4]  R. Baillargeon,et al.  Detecting continuity violations in infancy: a new account and new evidence from covering and tube events , 2005, Cognition.

[5]  E. Spelke,et al.  Object Perception in Infancy: Interaction of Spatial and Kinetic Information for Object Boundaries. , 1989 .

[6]  Marianella Casasola,et al.  The Development of Infants' Spatial Categories , 2008 .

[7]  A. Needham Object recognition and object segregation in 4.5-month-old infants. , 2001, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[8]  F. J. Langdon,et al.  The Child's Conception of Space , 1967 .

[9]  Guigang Zhang,et al.  Deep Learning , 2016, Int. J. Semantic Comput..

[10]  Susan J. Hespos,et al.  Reasoning about containment events in very young infants , 2001, Cognition.

[11]  Ad W. Smitsman,et al.  Infants' Perception of Dynamic Relations Between Objects: Passing Through or Support? , 1995 .

[12]  Ernest Davis,et al.  Reasoning from Radically Incomplete Information: The Case of Containers , 2013 .

[13]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks , 2012, Commun. ACM.

[14]  R. Kaufmann-Hayoz,et al.  Kinetic contours in infants' visual perception. , 1986, Child development.

[15]  M. Casasola,et al.  Six-month-old infants' categorization of containment spatial relations. , 2003, Child development.

[16]  A. Needham,et al.  Infants' use of prior experiences with objects in object segregation: implications for object recognition in infancy. , 1999, Advances in child development and behavior.

[17]  M. Casasola,et al.  Infant categorization of containment, support and tight‐fit spatial relationships , 2002 .

[18]  H. Neumann,et al.  Object Segmentation from Motion Discontinuities and Temporal Occlusions–A Biologically Inspired Model , 2008, PloS one.

[19]  Scott P. Johnson,et al.  Perception of object unity in young infants: The roles of motion, depth, and orientation , 1996 .

[20]  Shimon Ullman,et al.  The chains model for detecting parts by their context , 2010, 2010 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[21]  H. Barlow Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information: David Marr. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1982. pp. xvi + 397 , 1983 .

[22]  Susan J. Hespos,et al.  Conceptual precursors to language , 2004, Nature.

[23]  R. Baillargeon,et al.  2.5-Month-Old Infants' Reasoning about When Objects Should and Should Not Be Occluded , 1999, Cognitive Psychology.

[24]  Laurent Najman,et al.  Geodesic Saliency of Watershed Contours and Hierarchical Segmentation , 1996, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[25]  Michal Irani,et al.  Computing occluding and transparent motions , 1994, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[26]  Alessandro Verri,et al.  Motion Segmentation from Optical Flow , 1989, Alvey Vision Conference.

[27]  B. Schiele,et al.  Combined Object Categorization and Segmentation With an Implicit Shape Model , 2004 .

[28]  Albert Yonas,et al.  Infants' sensitivity to pictorial depth cues: a review and meta-analysis of looking studies. , 2012, Infant behavior & development.

[29]  G LoweDavid,et al.  Distinctive Image Features from Scale-Invariant Keypoints , 2004 .

[30]  Shimon Ullman,et al.  Learning to perceive coherent objects , 2013, CogSci.

[31]  R. Baillargeon,et al.  Effects of prior experience on 4.5-month-old infants' object segregation , 1998 .

[32]  Berthold K. P. Horn,et al.  Direct methods for recovering motion , 1988, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[33]  Daniel P. Huttenlocher,et al.  Spatial priors for part-based recognition using statistical models , 2005, 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'05).

[34]  A. Yonas,et al.  Infants' sensitivity to accretion and deletion of texture as information for depth at an edge. , 1984, Child development.

[35]  Susan J. Hespos,et al.  Conceptual development in infancy: The case of containment , 2002 .

[36]  Shmuel Peleg,et al.  Motion based segmentation , 1990, [1990] Proceedings. 10th International Conference on Pattern Recognition.

[37]  Aimee E. Stahl,et al.  Observing the unexpected enhances infants’ learning and exploration , 2015, Science.

[38]  Scott P. Johnson,et al.  Perception of kinetic illusory contours by two-month-old infants. , 2002, Child development.

[39]  W. B. Thompson,et al.  Relative motion: Kinetic information for the order of depth at an edge , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[40]  David Silverstein,et al.  The Case of the Containers , 2007 .

[41]  P. Burt,et al.  Mechanisms for isolating component patterns in the sequential analysis of multiple motion , 1991, Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Visual Motion.

[42]  Michael J. Black,et al.  The Robust Estimation of Multiple Motions: Parametric and Piecewise-Smooth Flow Fields , 1996, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[43]  R. Baillargeon,et al.  The Development of Young Infants' Intuitions about Support , 1992 .

[44]  Oliver Braddick,et al.  Binocularity in infancy , 1996, Eye.

[45]  R. Baillargeon,et al.  When the ordinary seems unexpected: evidence for incremental physical knowledge in young infants , 2005, Cognition.

[46]  Elizabeth S. Spelke,et al.  Principles of Object Perception , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[47]  E. Spelke,et al.  Perception of partly occluded objects in infancy , 1983, Cognitive Psychology.