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-citationThe misunderstood limits of folk science: An illusion of explanatory depth
Rozenblit, L., & Keil, F. (2002) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2605_1 · Cited by 1,032
Theory-based Bayesian models of inductive learning and reasoning
Tenenbaum, J. B., Griffiths, T. L., & Kemp, C. (2006) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.05.009 · Cited by 880
Self-citationProbabilistic models of cognition: exploring representations and inductive biases
Griffiths, T. L., Chater, N., Kemp, C., Perfors, A., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2010) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.05.004 · Cited by 568
Self-citationJones, M., & Love, B. C. (2011) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x10003134 · Cited by 533
A rational analysis of rule-based concept learning
Goodman, N. D., Tenenbaum, J. B., Feldman, J., & Griffiths, T. L. (2008) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1080/03640210701802071 · Cited by 469
Rational approximations to rational models: alternative algorithms for category learning
Sanborn, A. N., Griffiths, T. L., & Navarro, D. J. (2010) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0020511 · Cited by 369
Self-citationDecision theory: what “should” the nervous system do?
Körding, K. (2007) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1142998 · Cited by 313
Neural Coding of Uncertainty and Probability
Ma, W. J., & Jazayeri, M. (2014) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-071013-014017 · Cited by 290
Qualia: The Geometry of Integrated Information
Balduzzi, D., & Tononi, G. (2009) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000462 · Cited by 269
Structured statistical models of inductive reasoning
Kemp, C., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2009) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0014282 · Cited by 259
Self-citationInternal models in biological control
McNamee, D., & Wolpert, D. M. (2019) · Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems · doi:10.1146/annurev-control-060117-105206 · Cited by 225
Braun, D. A., Mehring, C., & Wolpert, D. M. (2010) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2009.08.031 · Cited by 210
How Robust Are Probabilistic Models of Higher-Level Cognition?
Marcus, G. F., & Davis, E. (2013) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797613495418 · Cited by 195
Griffiths, T. L., Chater, N., Norris, D., & Pouget, A. (2012) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0026884 · Cited by 192
Self-citationDiscovering latent causes in reinforcement learning
Gershman, S. J., Norman, K. A., & Niv, Y. (2015) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.07.007 · Cited by 151
Theoretical and empirical evidence for the impact of inductive biases on cultural evolution
Griffiths, T. L., Kalish, M. L., & Lewandowsky, S. (2008) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0146 · Cited by 131
Self-citationRational use of cognitive resources in human planning
Callaway, F., van Opheusden, B., Gul, S., Das, P., Krueger, P. M., Griffiths, T. L., & Lieder, F. (2022) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01332-8 · Cited by 121
Self-citationUnderstanding Human Intelligence through Human Limitations
Griffiths, T. L. (2020) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2020.09.001 · Cited by 88
Self-citationSoto, F. A., Gershman, S. J., & Niv, Y. (2014) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0037018 · Cited by 81
Development of visual object recognition
Ayzenberg, V., & Behrmann, M. (2023) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-023-00266-w · Cited by 41
Innovations With Schema Theory: Modern Implications For Learning, Memory, And Academic Achievement
-, R. M. (2024) · International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research · doi:10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i01.13785 · Cited by 19
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
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.
