Preserved Structure Across Vector Space Representations

Certain concepts, words, and images are intuitively more similar than others (dog vs. cat, dog vs. spoon), though quantifying such similarity is notoriously difficult. Indeed, this kind of computation is likely a critical part of learning the category boundaries for words within a given language. Here, we use a set of 27 items (e.g. 'dog') that are highly common in infants' input, and use both image- and word-based algorithms to independently compute similarity among them. We find three key results. First, the pairwise item similarities derived within image-space and word-space are correlated, suggesting preserved structure among these extremely different representational formats. Second, the closest 'neighbors' for each item, within each space, showed significant overlap (e.g. both found 'egg' as a neighbor of 'apple'). Third, items with the most overlapping neighbors are later-learned by infants and toddlers. We conclude that this approach, which does not rely on human ratings of similarity, may nevertheless reflect stable within-class structure across these two spaces. We speculate that such invariance might aid lexical acquisition, by serving as an informative marker of category boundaries.

[1]  Lynne M. Reder,et al.  Target-to-distractor similarity can help visual search performance , 2017, CogSci.

[2]  Naftali Tishby,et al.  Opening the Black Box of Deep Neural Networks via Information , 2017, ArXiv.

[3]  Zellig S. Harris,et al.  Distributional Structure , 1954 .

[4]  J. R. Firth,et al.  A Synopsis of Linguistic Theory, 1930-1955 , 1957 .

[5]  N. Chater,et al.  Similarity as transformation , 2003, Cognition.

[6]  J. Mandler Perceptual and Conceptual Processes in Infancy , 2000 .

[7]  Sergey Ioffe,et al.  Rethinking the Inception Architecture for Computer Vision , 2015, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[8]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  From the lexicon to expectations about kinds: a role for associative learning. , 2005, Psychological review.

[9]  H. Helmholtz The Facts in Perception , 1977 .

[10]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Development of infants’ attention to faces during the first year , 2009, Cognition.

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

[12]  Jeffrey Pennington,et al.  GloVe: Global Vectors for Word Representation , 2014, EMNLP.

[13]  Kunihiko Fukushima,et al.  Neocognitron: A Self-Organizing Neural Network Model for a Mechanism of Visual Pattern Recognition , 1982 .

[14]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Linguistic Cues Enhance the Learning of Perceptual Cues , 2005, Psychological science.

[15]  Joshua B. Tenenbaum,et al.  A Generative Theory of Similarity , 2005 .

[16]  R. Shepard,et al.  Second-order isomorphism of internal representations: Shapes of states ☆ , 1970 .

[17]  M. Brent,et al.  The role of exposure to isolated words in early vocabulary development , 2001, Cognition.

[18]  P. Quinn,et al.  A Reexamination of the Perceptual-to-Conceptual Shift in Mental Representations , 1997 .

[19]  S Edelman,et al.  Representation is representation of similarities , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[20]  P. D. Eimas,et al.  The Emergence of Category Representations During Infancy: Are Separate Perceptual and Conceptual Processes Required? , 2000 .

[21]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Syntactic context and the shape bias in children's and adults' lexical learning , 1992 .

[22]  Stefano Soatto,et al.  Emergence of Invariance and Disentanglement in Deep Representations , 2017, 2018 Information Theory and Applications Workshop (ITA).

[23]  J. Duncan,et al.  Visual search and stimulus similarity. , 1989, Psychological review.

[24]  J. Freyd The Facts of Perception. , 1991 .

[25]  Elika Bergelson,et al.  The acquisition of abstract words by young infants , 2013, Cognition.

[26]  V. Sloutsky The role of similarity in the development of categorization , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[27]  P. Quinn,et al.  Categorization in infancy , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[28]  A Treisman,et al.  Feature analysis in early vision: evidence from search asymmetries. , 1988, Psychological review.

[29]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Wordbank: an open repository for developmental vocabulary data* , 2016, Journal of Child Language.

[30]  K. Plunkett,et al.  The effects of perceptual similarity and category membership on early word-referent identification. , 2010, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[31]  A. Tversky Features of Similarity , 1977 .

[32]  Richard N Aslin,et al.  Nature and origins of the lexicon in 6-mo-olds , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[33]  Michael S. Bernstein,et al.  ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge , 2014, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[34]  L. Gleitman,et al.  Hard Words , 2005, Sentence First, Arguments Afterward.

[35]  L. Fenson,et al.  Lexical development norms for young children , 1996 .

[36]  Stefano Soatto,et al.  Emergence of invariance and disentangling in deep representations , 2017 .

[37]  E. Markman,et al.  Categories and induction in young children , 1986, Cognition.

[38]  Sabina Pauen,et al.  The role of functional information for infant categorization , 2007, Cognition.

[39]  Elika Bergelson,et al.  Semantic Networks Generated from Early Linguistic Input , 2017, bioRxiv.

[40]  V. Sloutsky,et al.  How much does a shared name make things similar? Linguistic labels, similarity, and the development of inductive inference. , 2001, Child development.

[41]  Understanding Early Categorization: One Process or Two? , 2000, Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies.

[42]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  Toward a universal decoder of linguistic meaning from brain activation , 2018, Nature Communications.

[43]  J. Werker,et al.  Infants listen for more phonetic detail in speech perception than in word-learning tasks , 1997, Nature.

[44]  D. Spalding The Principles of Psychology , 1873, Nature.