The Usual and the Unusual: Solving Remote Associates Test Tasks Using Simple Statistical Natural Language Processing Based on Language Use

In this study we show how complex creative relations can arise from fairly frequent semantic relations observed in everyday language. By doing this, we reflect on some key cognitive aspects of linguistic and general creativity. In our experimentation, we automated the process of solving a battery of Remote Associates Test tasks. By applying Statistical Natural Language Processing techniques to a large web-based corpus, we perform a frequency and collocation analysis of the test items. Results show that 37% of the 68 tasks were automatically solved, whereas human accuracy reached 43%. Our method outperformed humans in the tasks rated as difficult: 38% and 32%, respectively. Highly relevant is that the novel and adequate relations established in order to solve the RAT were not previously present in the corpus. The frequency based approach pervades all stages of our method: during the divergent stage, highly frequent collocations are listed, while the convergent stage starts by matching each task's triads output, shrinking that list, and finalizing it by choosing the least frequent, therefore more informative and often correct, result. Finally, we discuss the implications of our model in overcoming functional fixedness and understanding cognitive salience in the creative process.

[1]  Marco Baroni,et al.  BagPack: A General Framework to Represent Semantic Relations , 2009, ArXiv.

[2]  Deniz Yuret,et al.  Clustering Word Pairs to Answer Analogy Questions , 2006 .

[3]  David P. Dailey.  An Analysis and Evaluation of the Internal Validity of the Remote Associates Test: What Does it Measure? , 1978 .

[4]  B. Hommel,et al.  Development and Validity of a Dutch Version of the Remote Associates Task: An Item-Response Theory Approach. , 2012 .

[5]  J. Quesada,et al.  Analogy-making as Predication Using Relational Information and LSA Vectors , 2004 .

[6]  Joseph Dien,et al.  Remote Associates Test and Alpha Brain Waves , 2012, J. Probl. Solving.

[7]  John R. Anderson.  A spreading activation theory of memory. , 1983 .

[8]  Selmer Bringsjord,et al.  Psychometric artificial intelligence , 2011, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[9]  David Lee,et al.  Corpus Linguistics with BNCweb - a Practical Guide , 2008, English corpus linguistics.

[10]  Peter Willett,et al.  Document Retrieval Systems , 1988 .

[11]  D. Cai,et al.  REM, not incubation, improves creativity by priming associative networks , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  Michael S. Fine,et al.  Visual Salience Affects Performance in a Working Memory Task , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[13]  Selmer Bringsjord,et al.  A bottom-up complement to the logic-based top-down approach to the story arrangement test , 2011, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[14]  Cynthia M. Sifonis,et al.  The role of graded category structure in imaginative thought , 2002, Memory & cognition.

[15]  E. C. Thompson,et al.  Comparative Cultural Salience: Measures Using Free-List Data , 2006 .

[16]  Cynthia M. Sifonis,et al.  The Role of Specificity and Abstraction in Creative Idea Generation , 2004 .

[17]  J. Guilford,et al.  The nature of human intelligence. , 1968 .

[18]  Helmut Schmid,et al.  Improvements in Part-of-Speech Tagging with an Application to German , 1999 .

[19]  Victor A. Shames,et al.  Is there such a thing as implicit problem-solving? , 1994 .

[20]  Ted Dunning,et al.  Accurate Methods for the Statistics of Surprise and Coincidence , 1993, CL.

[21]  Michael X. Cohen,et al.  Intracranial EEG Correlates of Expectancy and Memory Formation in the Human Hippocampus and Nucleus Accumbens , 2010, Neuron.

[22]  A. Jacobs,et al.  Stimulus onset asynchrony and the timeline of word recognition: Event-related potentials during sentence reading , 2012, Neuropsychologia.

[23]  S. Mednick.  The associative basis of the creative process. , 1962, Psychological review.

[24]  Benjamin D. Jee,et al.  Investigating Insight as Sudden Learning , 2012, J. Probl. Solving.

[25]  Selmer Bringsjord,et al.  What is Artificial Intelligence? Psychometric AI as an Answer , 2003, IJCAI.

[26]  Pamela I. Ansburg,et al.  Creative and analytic thinkers differ in their use of attentional resources , 2003 .

[27]  Michael Oakes,et al.  Statistics for Corpus Linguistics , 1998 .

[28]  Selmer Bringsjord,et al.  "Pulling it All Together" via Psychometric AI , 2004, AAAI Technical Report.

[29]  Marlene A. Hamilton,et al.  “Jamaicanizing” the Mednick Remote Associates Test of Creativity , 1982 .

[30]  R. Jung,et al.  Neuroimaging creativity: A psychometric view , 2010, Behavioural Brain Research.

[31]  Michael J Cortese,et al.  Predicting semantic priming at the item level , 2008 .

[32]  Frank Smadja,et al.  Retrieving Collocations from Text: Xtract , 1993, CL.

[33]  Azurii K Collier,et al.  Intuitive Tip of the Tongue Judgments Predict Subsequent Problem Solving One Day Later , 2012, J. Probl. Solving.

[34]  Peter D. Turney.  Analogy perception applied to seven tests of word comprehension , 2011, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[35]  P. Shah,et al.  Uninhibited imaginations: Creativity in adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder , 2006 .

[36]  S. Clark,et al.  Word frequency effects in associative and item recognition , 1992, Memory & cognition.

[37]  Kirill Kireyev,et al.  Semantic-based Estimation of Term Informativeness , 2009, NAACL.

[38]  Mark Jung-Beeman,et al.  Normative data for 144 compound remote associate problems , 2003, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[39]  D. Gentner,et al.  Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought , 2003 .

[40]  Pedro L. Cobos,et al.  What Priming Techniques Can Tell Us about Associative Representations Acquired During Human Contingency Learning , 2010 .

[41]  G. Regehr,et al.  Intuition in the context of discovery , 1990, Cognitive Psychology.

[42]  Danushka Bollegala,et al.  Improving relational similarity measurement using symmetries in proportional word analogies , 2013, Inf. Process. Manag..

[43]  Thomas B. Ward,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity: Cognition and Creativity , 2010 .

[44]  雄二 馬場,et al.  JARAT FORM A-Remote Associates Testの成人用日本語版-に依る創造的活動の分析 , 1982 .

[45]  David J. Israel,et al.  A Question-Answering System for AP Chemistry: Assessing KR&R Technologies , 2004, KR.

[46]  Ted Pedersen.  Dependent Bigram Identification , 1998, AAAI/IAAI.

[47]  S. Sitton,et al.  Synesthesia, Creativity and Puns , 2004, Psychological reports.

[48]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  Domain transfer via cross-domain analogy , 2009, Cognitive Systems Research.

[49]  Sheri L. Johnson,et al.  Creativity and bipolar disorder: touched by fire or burning with questions? , 2012, Clinical psychology review.

[50]  Peter D. Turney.  A Uniform Approach to Analogies, Synonyms, Antonyms, and Associations , 2008, COLING.

[51]  D. Huber,et al.  The Road Not Taken , 2012, Psychological science.

[52]  S. Hashtroudi,et al.  Cognitive effort and the word frequency effect in recognition and lexical decision. , 1987, The American journal of psychology.

[53]  Genna Angello,et al.  Thinking can cause forgetting: memory dynamics in creative problem solving. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[54]  Lynne M Reder,et al.  The low-frequency encoding disadvantage: Word frequency affects processing demands. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[55]  Cynthia M. Sifonis,et al.  Attribute centrality and imaginative thought , 2000, Memory & cognition.

[56]  Steven M. Smith,et al.  Incubation and the persistence of fixation in problem solving. , 1991, The American journal of psychology.

[57]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  Using analogical model formulation with sketches to solve Bennett Mechanical Comprehension Test problems , 2011, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..