Escaping the Building Block / Rule Dichotomy : A Case Study

The traditional approach to complex problems in science and engineering is to break down each problem into a set of primitive building blocks, which are then combined by rules to form structures. In turn, these structures can be taken apart systematically to recover the original building blocks that went into them. Connectionist models of such complex problems (especially in the realm of cognitive science) have often been criticized for their putative failure to support this sort of compositionality, systematicity, and recoverability of components. In this paper we discuss a connectionist model, Recursive Auto-Associative Memory (RAAM), designed to deal with these issues. Specifically, we show how an initial approach to RAAM involving arbitrary building-block representations placed severe constraints on the scalability of the model. We describe a re-analysis the building-block and “rule” components of the model as merely two aspects of a single underlying nonlinear dynamical system, allowing the model to represent an unbounded number of well-formed compositional structures. We conclude by speculating about the insight that such a “unified” view might contribute to our attempts to understand and model rule-governed, compositional behavior in a variety of AI domains.

[1]  V. Wynne-Edwards Animal dispersion in relation to social behaviour , 1962 .

[2]  A. Zhabotinsky,et al.  Concentration Wave Propagation in Two-dimensional Liquid-phase Self-oscillating System , 1970, Nature.

[3]  R. Lewontin ‘The Selfish Gene’ , 1977, Nature.

[4]  J. Fodor The Modularity of mind. An essay on faculty psychology , 1986 .

[5]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  A Learning Algorithm for Boltzmann Machines , 1985, Cogn. Sci..

[6]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Learning internal representations by error propagation , 1986 .

[7]  E. Williams,et al.  On the definition of word , 1987 .

[8]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Genetic Algorithms in Search Optimization and Machine Learning , 1988 .

[9]  Michael F. Barnsley,et al.  Fractals everywhere , 1988 .

[10]  Jeffrey L. Elman,et al.  Finding Structure in Time , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[11]  Jordan B. Pollack,et al.  Recursive Distributed Representations , 1990, Artif. Intell..

[12]  L. Shastri,et al.  From simple associations to systematic reasoning: A connectionist representation of rules, variables and dynamic bindings using temporal synchrony , 1993, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[13]  Biing-Hwang Juang,et al.  Fundamentals of speech recognition , 1993, Prentice Hall signal processing series.

[14]  T. Landauer,et al.  A Solution to Plato's Problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of Acquisition, Induction, and Representation of Knowledge. , 1997 .

[15]  Jean-Arcady Meyer,et al.  Coevolving Communicative Behavior in a Linear Pursuer-Evader Game , 1998 .

[16]  Jordan B. Pollack,et al.  Coevolving communicative behavior in a linear pursuer-evadergame , 1998 .

[17]  Swathi Vanniarajan,et al.  WORDS AND RULES: THE INGREDIENTS OF LANGUAGE , 2001 .

[18]  J. Pollack,et al.  Compositional evolution: interdisciplinary investigations in evolvability, modularity, and symbiosis , 2002 .

[19]  Melanie Mitchell,et al.  What Makes a Problem Hard for a Genetic Algorithm? Some Anomalous Results and Their Explanation , 2004, Machine Learning.