Production of Supra-regular Spatial Sequences by Macaque Monkeys

Understanding and producing embedded sequences in language, music, or mathematics, is a central characteristic of our species. These domains are hypothesized to involve a human-specific competence for supra-regular grammars, which can generate embedded sequences that go beyond the regular sequences engendered by finite-state automata. However, is this capacity truly unique to humans? Using a production task, we show that macaque monkeys can be trained to produce time-symmetrical embedded spatial sequences whose formal description requires supra-regular grammars or, equivalently, a push-down stack automaton. Monkeys spontaneously generalized the learned grammar to novel sequences, including longer ones, and could generate hierarchical sequences formed by an embedding of two levels of abstract rules. Compared to monkeys, however, preschool children learned the grammars much faster using a chunking strategy. While supra-regular grammars are accessible to nonhuman primates through extensive training, human uniqueness may lie in the speed and learning strategy with which they are acquired.

[1]  Fenna H. Poletiek,et al.  What baboons can (not) tell us about natural language grammars , 2016, Cognition.

[2]  Tetsuro Matsuzawa,et al.  Cognition: Numerical memory span in a chimpanzee , 2000, Nature.

[3]  Timothy Q. Gentner,et al.  Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds , 2006, Nature.

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

[5]  T. Deacon The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Brain , 1998 .

[6]  C. Büchel,et al.  Broca's area and the language instinct , 2003, Nature Neuroscience.

[7]  Christopher Potts,et al.  Tree-Structured Composition in Neural Networks without Tree-Structured Architectures , 2015, CoCo@NIPS.

[8]  W. Fitch,et al.  Non-adjacent visual dependency learning in chimpanzees , 2015, Animal Cognition.

[9]  W Tecumseh Fitch,et al.  Toward a computational framework for cognitive biology: unifying approaches from cognitive neuroscience and comparative cognition. , 2014, Physics of life reviews.

[10]  A. Anwander,et al.  The brain differentiates human and non-human grammars: Functional localization and structural connectivity , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  W. Fitch,et al.  Empirical approaches to the study of language evolution , 2017, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[12]  Charles Kemp,et al.  The discovery of structural form , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  Carel ten Cate,et al.  Assessing the uniqueness of language: Animal grammatical abilities take center stage. , 2017 .

[14]  J. Gomez,et al.  Production and perception rules underlying visual patterns: effects of symmetry and hierarchy , 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[15]  Emmanuel Dupoux,et al.  Assessing the Ability of LSTMs to Learn Syntax-Sensitive Dependencies , 2016, TACL.

[16]  W. Thorpe Learning and instinct in animals , 1956 .

[17]  R. Berwick,et al.  Songs to syntax: the linguistics of birdsong , 2011, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[18]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Conserved Sequence Processing in Primate Frontal Cortex , 2017, Trends in Neurosciences.

[19]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Sequential learning in non-human primates , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[20]  Hongyu Guo,et al.  Long Short-Term Memory Over Recursive Structures , 2015, ICML.

[21]  P. Marler A comparative approach to vocal learning: Song development in white-crowned sparrows. , 1970 .

[22]  Kazuo Okanoya,et al.  Revisiting the syntactic abilities of non-human animals: natural vocalizations and artificial grammar learning , 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[23]  W. Fitch,et al.  More than one way to see it: Individual heuristics in avian visual computation , 2015, Cognition.

[24]  Carel Ten Cate,et al.  Budgerigars and zebra finches differ in how they generalize in an artificial grammar learning experiment , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[25]  W. Fitch,et al.  Computational Constraints on Syntactic Processing in a Nonhuman Primate , 2004, Science.

[26]  Esther Mondragón,et al.  Rule Learning by Rats , 2008, Science.

[27]  Kentaro Abe,et al.  Songbirds possess the spontaneous ability to discriminate syntactic rules , 2011, Nature Neuroscience.

[28]  A. Graybiel,et al.  Representation of Action Sequence Boundaries by Macaque Prefrontal Cortical Neurons , 2003, Science.

[29]  Timothy E. J. Behrens,et al.  The evolution of the arcuate fasciculus revealed with comparative DTI , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[30]  Florent Meyniel,et al.  The Neural Representation of Sequences: From Transition Probabilities to Algebraic Patterns and Linguistic Trees , 2015, Neuron.

[31]  Willem H. Zuidema,et al.  Simple rules can explain discrimination of putative recursive syntactic structures by a songbird species , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[32]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Left inferior frontal cortex and syntax: function, structure and behaviour in patients with left hemisphere damage , 2011, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[33]  Stephen B. Fountain,et al.  The Organization of Sequential BehaviorConditioning, Memory, and Abstraction , 2012 .

[34]  Angela D. Friederici,et al.  Artificial grammar learning meets formal language theory: an overview , 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[35]  H S Terrace,et al.  Ordering of the numerosities 1 to 9 by monkeys. , 1998, Science.

[36]  S. Dehaene,et al.  Representation of Numerical and Sequential Patterns in Macaque and Human Brains , 2015, Current Biology.

[37]  T. Matsuzawa,et al.  Working memory of numerals in chimpanzees , 2007, Current Biology.

[38]  Donald Favareau The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Brain , 1998 .

[39]  Mariano Sigman,et al.  The language of geometry: Fast comprehension of geometrical primitives and rules in human adults and preschoolers , 2017, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[40]  Robert C. Berwick,et al.  What do animals learn in artificial grammar studies? , 2017, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[41]  Charles Yang,et al.  The Price of Linguistic Productivity: How Children Learn to Break the Rules of Language , 2016 .

[42]  Adam G. Thomas,et al.  Comparison of Human Ventral Frontal Cortex Areas for Cognitive Control and Language with Areas in Monkey Frontal Cortex , 2014, Neuron.

[43]  Yukiko Kikuchi,et al.  Auditory Artificial Grammar Learning in Macaque and Marmoset Monkeys , 2013, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[44]  Tetsuro Matsuzawa,et al.  Evolution of the brain and social behavior in chimpanzees , 2013, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[45]  S. Dehaene,et al.  Cortical representation of the constituent structure of sentences , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[46]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Aspects of the Theory of Syntax , 1970 .

[47]  James Rogers,et al.  Formal language theory: refining the Chomsky hierarchy , 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[48]  A. Rey,et al.  Centre-embedded structures are a by-product of associative learning and working memory constraints: Evidence from baboons (Papio Papio) , 2012, Cognition.

[49]  P. Hayes,et al.  Analogy , 2000, Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology.

[50]  J. Tanji,et al.  Categorization of behavioural sequences in the prefrontal cortex , 2007, Nature.

[51]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? , 2002 .