Since the experiments of Saffran et al. (1996a), there has been a great deal of interest in the question of how statistical regularities in the speech stream might be used by infants to begin to identify individual words. In this work, we use computational modeling to explore the effects of different assumptions the learner might make regarding the nature of words – in particular, how these assumptions affect the kinds of words that are segmented from a corpus of transcribed child-directed speech. We develop several models within a Bayesian ideal observer framework, and use them to examine the consequences of assuming either that words are independent units, or units that help to predict other units. We show through empirical and theoretical results that the assumption of independence causes the learner to undersegment the corpus, with many two- and three-word sequences (e.g. what’s that, do you, in the house) misidentified as individual words. In contrast, when the learner assumes that words are predictive, the resulting segmentation is far more accurate. These results indicate that taking context into account is important for a statistical word segmentation strategy to be successful, and raise the possibility that even young infants may be able to exploit more subtle statistical patterns than have usually been considered. 1

Abstract not found

Abstract not found

What mechanisms support the ability of human infants, adults, and other primates to identify words from fluent speech using distributional regularities? In order to better characterize this ability, we collected data from adults in an artificial language segmentation task similar to Saffran, Newport, and Aslin (1996) in which the length of sentences was systematically varied between groups of participants. We then compared the fit of a variety of computational models— including simple statistical models of transitional probability and mutual information, a clustering model based on mutual information by Swingley (2005), PARSER (Perruchet & Vintner, 1998), and a Bayesian model. We found that while all models were able to successfully complete the task, fit to the human data varied considerably, with the Bayesian model achieving the highest correlation with our results.

Rational models of cognition typically consider the abstract computational problems posed by the environment, assuming that people are capable of optimally solving those problems. This differs from more traditional formal models of cognition, which focus on the psychological processes responsible for behavior. A basic challenge for rational models is thus explaining how optimal solutions can be approximated by psychological processes. We outline a general strategy for answering this question, namely to explore the psychological plausibility of approximation algorithms developed in computer science and statistics. In particular, we argue that Monte Carlo methods provide a source of “rational process models” that connect optimal solutions to psychological processes. We support this argument through a detailed example, applying this approach to Anderson’s (1990, 1991) Rational Model of Categorization (RMC), which involves a particularly challenging computational problem. Drawing on a connection between the RMC and ideas from nonparametric Bayesian statistics, we propose two alternative algorithms for approximate inference in this model. The algorithms we consider include Gibbs sampling, a procedure

While many perceptual and cognitive phenomena are well described in terms of Bayesian inference, the necessary computations are intractable at the scale of realworld tasks, and it remains unclear how the human mind approximates Bayesian computations algorithmically. We explore the proposal that for some tasks, humans use a form of Markov Chain Monte Carlo to approximate the posterior distribution over hidden variables. As a case study, we show how several phenomena of perceptual multistability can be explained as MCMC inference in simple graphical models for low-level vision. 1

I argue that Non-Photorealistic Rendering (NPR) research will play a key role in the scientific understanding of visual art and illustration. NPR can contribute to scientific understanding of two kinds of problems: how do artists create imagery, and how do observers respond to artistic imagery? I sketch out some of the open problems, how NPR can help, and what some possible theories might look like. Additionally, I discuss the thorny problem of how to evaluate NPR research and theories.

A. Redish et al. (2007) proposed a reinforcement learning model of context-dependent learning and extinction in conditioning experiments, using the idea of “state classification ” to categorize new observations into states. In the current article, the authors propose an interpretation of this idea in terms of normative statistical inference. They focus on renewal and latent inhibition, 2 conditioning paradigms in which contextual manipulations have been studied extensively, and show that online Bayesian inference within a model that assumes an unbounded number of latent causes can characterize a diverse set of behavioral results from such manipulations, some of which pose problems for the model of Redish et al. Moreover, in both paradigms, context dependence is absent in younger animals, or if hippocampal lesions are made prior to training. The authors suggest an explanation in terms of a restricted capacity to infer new causes.

Bandit problems provide an interesting and widely-used setting for the study of sequential decision-making. In their most basic form, bandit problems require people to choose repeatedly between a small number of alternatives, each of which has an unknown rate of providing reward. We investigate restless bandit problems, where the distributions of reward rates for the alternatives change over time. This dynamic environment encourages the decision-maker to cycle between states of exploration and exploitation. In one environment we consider, the changes occur at discrete, but hidden, time points. In a second environment, changes occur gradually across time. Decision data were collected from people in each environment. Individuals varied substantially in overall performance and the degree to which they switched between alternatives. We modeled human performance in the restless bandit tasks with two particle filter models, one that can approximate the optimal solution to a discrete restless bandit problem, and another simpler particle filter that is more psychologically plausible. It was found that the simple particle filter was able to account for most of the individual differences.

Numerous proposals have been put forward concerning the nature of human category representations, ranging from rules to exemplars to prototypes. However, it is unlikely that a single, fixed form of representation is sufficient to account for the flexibility of human categories. In this chapter, we describe an alternative to these fixed-representation accounts based on the principle of adaptive clustering. The specific model we consider, SUSTAIN, represents categories in terms of feature bundles called clusters which are adaptively recruited in response to task demands.