Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userBongard-LOGO: A New Benchmark for Human-Level Concept Learning and Reasoning
305
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Weili Nie
Publication date
2020
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Humans have an inherent ability to learn novel concepts from only a few samples and generalize these concepts to different situations. Even though todays machine learning models excel with a plethora of training data on standard recognition tasks, a considerable gap exists between machine-level pattern recognition and human-level concept learning. To narrow this gap, the Bongard problems (BPs) were introduced as an inspirational challenge for visual cognition in intelligent systems. Despite new advances in representation learning and learning to learn, BPs remain a daunting challenge for modern AI. Inspired by the original one hundred BPs, we propose a new benchmark Bongard-LOGO for human-level concept learning and reasoning. We develop a program-guided generation technique to produce a large set of human-interpretable visual cognition problems in action-oriented LOGO language. Our benchmark captures three core properties of human cognition: 1) context-dependent perception, in which the same object may have disparate interpretations given different contexts; 2) analogy-making perception, in which some meaningful concepts are traded off for other meaningful concepts; and 3) perception with a few samples but infinite vocabulary. In experiments, we show that the state-of-the-art deep learning methods perform substantially worse than human subjects, implying that they fail to capture core human cognition properties. Finally, we discuss research directions towards a general architecture for visual reasoning to tackle this benchmark.
rate research
Read More
For machine agents to successfully interact with humans in real-world settings, they will need to develop an understanding of human mental life. Intuitive psychology, the ability to reason about hidden mental variables that drive observable actions, comes naturally to people: even pre-verbal infants can tell agents from objects, expecting agents to act efficiently to achieve goals given constraints. Despite recent interest in machine agents that reason about other agents, it is not clear if such agents learn or hold the core psychology principles that drive human reasoning. Inspired by cognitive development studies on intuitive psychology, we present a benchmark consisting of a large dataset of procedurally generated 3D animations, AGENT (Action, Goal, Efficiency, coNstraint, uTility), structured around four scenarios (goal preferences, action efficiency, unobserved constraints, and cost-reward trade-offs) that probe key concepts of core intuitive psychology. We validate AGENT with human-ratings, propose an evaluation protocol emphasizing generalization, and compare two strong baselines built on Bayesian inverse planning and a Theory of Mind neural network. Our results suggest that to pass the designed tests of core intuitive psychology at human levels, a model must acquire or have built-in representations of how agents plan, combining utility computations and core knowledge of objects and physics.
In order to reach human performance on complexvisual tasks, artificial systems need to incorporate a sig-nificant amount of understanding of the world in termsof macroscopic objects, movements, forces, etc. Inspiredby work on intuitive physics in infants, we propose anevaluation benchmark which diagnoses how much a givensystem understands about physics by testing whether itcan tell apart well matched videos of possible versusimpossible events constructed with a game engine. Thetest requires systems to compute a physical plausibilityscore over an entire video. It is free of bias and cantest a range of basic physical reasoning concepts. Wethen describe two Deep Neural Networks systems aimedat learning intuitive physics in an unsupervised way,using only physically possible videos. The systems aretrained with a future semantic mask prediction objectiveand tested on the possible versus impossible discrimi-nation task. The analysis of their results compared tohuman data gives novel insights in the potentials andlimitations of next frame prediction architectures.
Humans can learn and reason under substantial uncertainty in a space of infinitely many concepts, including structured relational concepts (a scene with objects that have the same color) and ad-hoc categories defined through goals (objects that could fall on ones head). In contrast, standard classification benchmarks: 1) consider only a fixed set of category labels, 2) do not evaluate compositional concept learning and 3) do not explicitly capture a notion of reasoning under uncertainty. We introduce a new few-shot, meta-learning benchmark, Compositional Reasoning Under Uncertainty (CURI) to bridge this gap. CURI evaluates different aspects of productive and systematic generalization, including abstract understandings of disentangling, productive generalization, learning boolean operations, variable binding, etc. Importantly, it also defines a model-independent compositionality gap to evaluate the difficulty of generalizing out-of-distribution along each of these axes. Extensive evaluations across a range of modeling choices spanning different modalities (image, schemas, and sounds), splits, privileged auxiliary concept information, and choices of negatives reveal substantial scope for modeling advances on the proposed task. All code and datasets will be available online.
Humans are well-versed in reasoning about the behaviors of physical objects when choosing actions to accomplish tasks, while it remains a major challenge for AI. To facilitate research addressing this problem, we propose a new benchmark that requires an agent to reason about physical scenarios and take an action accordingly. Inspired by the physical knowledge acquired in infancy and the capabilities required for robots to operate in real-world environments, we identify 15 essential physical scenarios. For each scenario, we create a wide variety of distinct task templates, and we ensure all the task templates within the same scenario can be solved by using one specific physical rule. By having such a design, we evaluate two distinct levels of generalization, namely the local generalization and the broad generalization. We conduct an extensive evaluation with human players, learning agents with varying input types and architectures, and heuristic agents with different strategies. The benchmark gives a Phy-Q (physical reasoning quotient) score that reflects the physical reasoning ability of the agents. Our evaluation shows that 1) all agents fail to reach human performance, and 2) learning agents, even with good local generalization ability, struggle to learn the underlying physical reasoning rules and fail to generalize broadly. We encourage the development of intelligent agents with broad generalization abilities in physical domains.
We present miniF2F, a dataset of formal Olympiad-level mathematics problems statements intended to provide a unified cross-system benchmark for neural theorem proving. The miniF2F benchmark currently targets Metamath, Lean, and Isabelle and consists of 488 problem statements drawn from the AIME, AMC, and the International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO), as well as material from high-school and undergraduate mathematics courses. We report baseline results using GPT-f, a neural theorem prover based on GPT-3 and provide an analysis of its performance. We intend for miniF2F to be a community-driven effort and hope that our benchmark will help spur advances in neural theorem proving.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
