CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 9Neural Networks and ApplicationsCognitive Science and Education ResearchEmbodied and Extended Cognition

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Schema-learning and rebinding as mechanisms of in-context learning and emergence

Open access
Swaminathan, Sivaramakrishnan, Dedieu, Antoine, Raju, Rajkumar Vasudeva, Shanahan, Murray, Lazaro-Gredilla, Miguel, George, Dileep·2023·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2307.01201arXiv 2307.01201
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In-context learning (ICL) is one of the most powerful and most unexpected capabilities to emerge in recent transformer-based large language models (LLMs). Yet the mechanisms that underlie it are poorly understood. In this paper, we demonstrate that comparable ICL capabilities can be acquired by an alternative sequence prediction learning method using clone-structured causal graphs (CSCGs). Moreover, a key property of CSCGs is that, unlike transformer-based LLMs, they are {\em interpretable}, which considerably simplifies the task of explaining how ICL works. Specifically, we show that it uses a combination of (a) learning template (schema) circuits for pattern completion, (b) retrieving relevant templates in a context-sensitive manner, and (c) rebinding of novel tokens to appropriate slots in the templates. We go on to marshall evidence for the hypothesis that similar mechanisms underlie ICL in LLMs. For example, we find that, with CSCGs as with LLMs, different capabilities emerge at different levels of overparameterization, suggesting that overparameterization helps in learning more complex template (schema) circuits. By showing how ICL can be achieved with small models and datasets, we open up a path to novel architectures, and take a vital step towards a more general understanding of the mechanics behind this important capability.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2307.01201

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 52

  1. Tom Brown et al. "Language models are few-shot learners". In: Advances in neural information processing systems 33 (2020), pp. 1877-1901.
  2. Taylor Webb, Keith J Holyoak, and Hongjing Lu. "Emergent Analogical Reasoning in Large Language Models". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.09196 (2022). · arXiv
  3. Sang Michael Xie et al. "An explanation of in-context learning as implicit bayesian inference". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.02080 (2021). · arXiv
  4. Damai Dai et al. "Why Can GPT Learn In-Context? Language Models Secretly Perform Gradient Descent as Meta Optimizers". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.10559 (2022). · arXiv
  5. Catherine Olsson et al. "In-context learning and induction heads". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.11895 (2022). · arXiv
  6. Antoine Dedieu et al. "Learning higher-order sequential structure with cloned HMMs". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.00507 (2019). · arXiv
  7. Murray Shanahan and Melanie Mitchell. "Abstraction for Deep Reinforcement Learning". In: Proceedings of the Thirty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-22. 2022, pp. 5588-5596.
  8. Neel Nanda et al. "Progress measures for grokking via mechanistic interpretability". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.05217 (2023). · arXiv
  9. Kevin Meng et al. "Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPT". In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2022).
  10. Ashish Vaswani et al. "Attention is all you need". In: Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017).
  11. Lonnie Chrisman. "Reinforcement learning with perceptual aliasing: The perceptual distinctions approach". In: AAAI. Vol. 1992. Citeseer. 1992, pp. 183-188.
  12. Judea Pearl. Causality. Cambridge university press, 2009.
  13. Vatsal Sharan et al. "Learning overcomplete hmms". In: Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems 30 (2017).
  14. J Swaroop Guntupalli et al. "Graph schemas as abstractions for transfer learning, inference, and planning". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.07350 (2023). · arXiv
  15. Jonas Peters, Dominik Janzing, and Bernhard Schölkopf. Elements of causal inference: founda- tions and learning algorithms. The MIT Press, 2017.
  16. Daniel Eaton and Kevin Murphy. "Exact Bayesian structure learning from uncertain interven- tions". In: Artificial intelligence and statistics. PMLR. 2007, pp. 107-114.
  17. Arthur P Dempster, Nan M Laird, and Donald B Rubin. "Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm". In: Journal of the royal statistical society: series B (methodological) 39.1 (1977), pp. 1-22.
  18. Bingbin Liu et al. "Transformers learn shortcuts to automata". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.10749 (2022). · arXiv
  19. Oren Kolodny, Arnon Lotem, and Shimon Edelman. "Learning a generative probabilistic grammar of experience: A process-level model of language acquisition". In: Cognitive Science 39.2 (2015), pp. 227-267.
  20. Zoubin Ghahramani and Michael Jordan. "Factorial hidden Markov models". In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 8 (1995).
  21. Frederick Jelinek. "Continuous speech recognition by statistical methods". In: Proceedings of the IEEE 64.4 (1976), pp. 532-556.
  22. Tomihisa Kamada, Satoru Kawai, et al. "An algorithm for drawing general undirected graphs". In: Information processing letters 31.1 (1989), pp. 7-15.
  23. Haley A Vlach and Catherine A DeBrock. "Remember dax? Relations between children's cross- situational word learning, memory, and language abilities". In: Journal of memory and language 93 (2017), pp. 217-230.
  24. Hong Chen et al. "PreCo: A large-scale dataset in preschool vocabulary for coreference resolu- tion". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.09807 (2018). · arXiv
  25. Patrick H Winston. "Learning and reasoning by analogy". In: Communications of the ACM 23.12 (1980), pp. 689-703.
  26. Katie C Bittner et al. "Behavioral time scale synaptic plasticity underlies CA1 place fields". In: Science 357.6355 (2017), pp. 1033-1036.
  27. Jason Wei et al. "Chain of thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.11903 (2022). · arXiv
  28. Denny Zhou et al. "Least-to-most prompting enables complex reasoning in large language models". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.10625 (2022). · arXiv
  29. Léon Bottou, Frank E Curtis, and Jorge Nocedal. "Optimization methods for large-scale machine learning". In: SIAM review 60.2 (2018), pp. 223-311.
  30. Sebastian Ruder. "An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.04747 (2016). · arXiv
  31. Diederik P Kingma and Jimmy Ba. "Adam: A method for stochastic optimization". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 (2014). · arXiv
  32. Yaqing Wang et al. "Generalizing from a few examples: A survey on few-shot learning". In: ACM computing surveys (csur) 53.3 (2020), pp. 1-34.
  33. Li Fei-Fei, Robert Fergus, and Pietro Perona. "One-shot learning of object categories". In: IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 28.4 (2006), pp. 594-611.
  34. Brenden M Lake, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Joshua B Tenenbaum. "Human-level concept learning through probabilistic program induction". In: Science 350.6266 (2015), pp. 1332- 1338.
  35. Victor Sanh et al. "Multitask prompted training enables zero-shot task generalization". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.08207 (2021). · arXiv
  36. Jason Wei et al. "Finetuned language models are zero-shot learners". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.01652 (2021). · arXiv
  37. Sewon Min et al. "Metaicl: Learning to learn in context". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.15943 (2021). · arXiv
  38. Yanda Chen et al. "Meta-learning via language model in-context tuning". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.07814 (2021). · arXiv
  39. Devang K Naik and Richard J Mammone. "Meta-neural networks that learn by learning". In: [Proceedings 1992] IJCNN International Joint Conference on Neural Networks. Vol. 1. IEEE. 1992, pp. 437-442.
  40. Sachin Ravi and Hugo Larochelle. "Optimization as a model for few-shot learning". In: Inter- national conference on learning representations. 2017.
  41. Sepp Hochreiter, A Steven Younger, and Peter R Conwell. "Learning to learn using gradient descent". In: Artificial Neural Networks-ICANN 2001: International Conference Vienna, Austria, August 21-25, 2001 Proceedings 11. Springer. 2001, pp. 87-94.
  42. Stephanie Chan et al. "Data distributional properties drive emergent in-context learning in transformers". In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), pp. 18878- 18891.
  43. Shivam Garg et al. "What can transformers learn in-context? a case study of simple function classes". In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), pp. 30583-30598.
  44. Ekin Akyürek et al. "What learning algorithm is in-context learning? investigations with linear models". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.15661 (2022). · arXiv
  45. Yuxuan Li and James L McClelland. "Systematic Generalization and Emergent Structures in Transformers Trained on Structured Tasks". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.00400 (2022). · arXiv
  46. Seongjin Shin et al. "On the effect of pretraining corpora on in-context learning by a large-scale language model". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.13509 (2022). · arXiv
  47. Jason Wei et al. "Emergent abilities of large language models". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.07682 (2022). · arXiv
  48. Zihao Zhao et al. "Calibrate before use: Improving few-shot performance of language models". In: International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR. 2021, pp. 12697-12706.
  49. Sewon Min et al. "Rethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?" In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.12837 (2022). · arXiv
  50. Jiachang Liu et al. "What Makes Good In-Context Examples for GPT-3?" In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.06804 (2021). · arXiv
  51. Andrew K Lampinen et al. "Can language models learn from explanations in context?" In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.02329 (2022). · arXiv
  52. Rylan Schaeffer, Brando Miranda, and Sanmi Koyejo. "Are Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models a Mirage?" In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.15004 (2023). · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 9

Related

Metadata

Authors
Swaminathan, S., Dedieu, A., Raju, R. V., Shanahan, M., Lazaro-Gredilla, M., & George, D.
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
Pages
28785-28804
ISSN
1049-5258 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2307.01201
arXiv
2307.01201
OpenAlex
W7133220354
Cited by
8
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 3
FWCI
1.42
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • neural information processing systems (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Cognitive Science and Education Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
Keywords
schema learning, rebinding, in-context learning, emergence, cognitive development

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