The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Generalization, similarity, and Bayesian inference
Abstract
Shepard has argued that a universal law should govern generalization across different domains of perception and cognition, as well as across organisms from different species or even different planets. Starting with some basic assumptions about natural kinds, he derived an exponential decay function as the form of the universal generalization gradient, which accords strikingly well with a wide range of empirical data. However, his original formulation applied only to the ideal case of generalization from a single encountered stimulus to a single novel stimulus, and for stimuli that can be represented as points in a continuous metric psychological space. Here we recast Shepard's theory in a more general Bayesian framework and show how this naturally extends his approach to the more realistic situation of generalizing from multiple consequential stimuli with arbitrary representational structure. Our framework also subsumes a version of Tversky's set-theoretic model of similarity, which is conventionally thought of as the primary alternative to Shepard's continuous metric space model of similarity and generalization. This unification allows us not only to draw deep parallels between the set-theoretic and spatial approaches, but also to significantly advance the explanatory power of set-theoretic models.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Inductive judgments about natural categories
Rips, L. J. (1975) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(75)80055-7 · Cited by 465
Cited by
The Neural Basis of Decision Making
Gold, J. I., & Shadlen, M. N. (2007) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.29.051605.113038 · Cited by 3,764
How to grow a mind: Statistics, structure, and abstraction
Tenenbaum, J. B., Kemp, C., Griffiths, T. L., & Goodman, N. D. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1192788 · Cited by 1,815
Self-citationObject perception as Bayesian inference
Kersten, D., Mamassian, P., & Yuille, A. (2004) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142005 · Cited by 1,269
Taskonomy: Disentangling Task Transfer Learning
Zamir, A. R., Sax, A., Shen, W., Guibas, L., Malik, J., & Savarese, S. (2018) · 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2018.00391 · Cited by 1,128
Topics in semantic representation
Griffiths, T. L., Steyvers, M., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2007) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.114.2.211 · Cited by 1,122
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Tenenbaum, J. B., & Griffiths, T. L.
- Venue
- Behavioral and Brain Sciences
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2001-08
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 629-640
- ISSN
- 0140-525X (ISSN-L)
- 1469-1825
- OpenAlex
- W2027796863
- Cited by
- 854
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 13.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Generalization, similarity, and Bayesian inference. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0140525x01000061
- The paper
- Tenenbaum, J. B., & Griffiths, T. L. (2001). Generalization, similarity, and Bayesian inference. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x01000061
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.