Development and Disintegration of Conceptual Knowledge: A Parallel-Distributed Processing Approach James L. McClelland Department of Psychology and Center.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Visual Word Recognition II Language Use and Understanding Class 4.
Advertisements

Language and Cognition Colombo, June 2011 Day 8 Aphasia: disorders of comprehension.
Cognitive Neuroscience of Language 1. Premise 1: Constituent Cognitive Processes Phonological analysis Syntactic analysis Semantic analysis Premise 2:
Chapter 9 Knowledge.
Tuomas Sandholm Carnegie Mellon University Computer Science Department
PDP: Motivation, basic approach. Cognitive psychology or “How the Mind Works”
Does the Brain Use Symbols or Distributed Representations? James L. McClelland Department of Psychology and Center for Mind, Brain, and Computation Stanford.
Read this article for Friday Oct 21! Trends in Neuroscience (2000) 23, Hint #1: there are at least 3 ways of getting this article Hint #2: none.
Knowledge ß How do we organize our knowledge? ß How do we access our knowledge? ß Do we really use categories?
Emergence in Cognitive Science: Semantic Cognition Jay McClelland Stanford University.
Emergence of Semantic Structure from Experience Jay McClelland Stanford University.
Language, Mind, and Brain by Ewa Dabrowska Chapter 10: The cognitive enterprise.
Un Supervised Learning & Self Organizing Maps Learning From Examples
COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE
Reading. Reading Research Processes involved in reading –Orthography (the spelling of words) –Phonology (the sound of words) –Word meaning –Syntax –Higher-level.
Knowledge information that is gained and retained what someone has acquired and learned organized in some way into our memory.
Categorization  How do we organize our knowledge?  How do we retrieve knowledge when we need it?
The ‘when’ pathway of the right parietal lobe L. Battelli A. Pascual - LeoneP. Cavanagh.
Rules or Connections in Past Tense Inflections Psychology 209 February 4, 2013.
Cooperation of Complementary Learning Systems in Memory Review and Update on the Complementary Learning Systems Framework James L. McClelland Psychology.
Development and Disintegration of Conceptual Knowledge: A Parallel-Distributed Processing Approach Jay McClelland Department of Psychology and Center for.
Learning, memory & amnesia
Using Backprop to Understand Apects of Cognitive Development PDP Class Feb 8, 2010.
Representation, Development and Disintegration of Conceptual Knowledge: A Parallel-Distributed Processing Approach James L. McClelland Department of Psychology.
Emergence of Semantic Structure from Experience Jay McClelland Stanford University.
James L. McClelland Stanford University
Stochastic Optimization and Simulated Annealing Psychology /719 January 25, 2001.
Conceptual Hierarchies Arise from the Dynamics of Learning and Processing: Insights from a Flat Attractor Network Christopher M. O’ConnorKen McRaeGeorge.
Integrating New Findings into the Complementary Learning Systems Theory of Memory Jay McClelland, Stanford University.
The PDP Approach to Understanding the Mind and Brain Jay McClelland Stanford University January 21, 2014.
Disintegration of Conceptual Knowledge In Semantic Dementia James L. McClelland Department of Psychology and Center for Mind, Brain, and Computation Stanford.
1 Computational Vision CSCI 363, Fall 2012 Lecture 31 Heading Models.
Awakening from the Cartesian Dream: The PDP Approach to Understanding the Mind and Brain Jay McClelland Stanford University February 7, 2013.
Contrasting Approaches To Semantic Knowledge Representation and Inference Psychology 209 February 15, 2013.
MULTIPLE MEMORY SYSTEM IN HUMANS
Emergence of Semantic Knowledge from Experience Jay McClelland Stanford University.
The Influence of Feature Type, Feature Structure and Psycholinguistic Parameters on the Naming Performance of Semantic Dementia and Alzheimer’s Patients.
Development, Disintegration, and Neural Basis of Semantic Cognition: A Parallel-Distributed Processing Approach James L. McClelland Department of Psychology.
Emergence of Semantic Structure from Experience Jay McClelland Stanford University.
Similarity and Attribution Contrasting Approaches To Semantic Knowledge Representation and Inference Jay McClelland Stanford University.
Rapid integration of new schema- consistent information in the Complementary Learning Systems Theory Jay McClelland, Stanford University.
Semantic Cognition: A Parallel Distributed Processing Approach James L. McClelland Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition and Departments of Psychology.
The PDP Approach to Understanding the Mind and Brain Jay McClelland Stanford University January 21, 2014.
Origins of Cognitive Abilities Jay McClelland Stanford University.
The Emergent Structure of Semantic Knowledge
Memory: Its Nature and Organization in the Brain James L. McClelland Stanford University.
Verbal Representation of Knowledge
Emergent Semantics: Meaning and Metaphor Jay McClelland Department of Psychology and Center for Mind, Brain, and Computation Stanford University.
The Emergentist Approach To Language As Embodied in Connectionist Networks James L. McClelland Stanford University.
Semantic Knowledge: Its Nature, its Development, and its Neural Basis James L. McClelland Department of Psychology and Center for Mind, Brain, and Computation.
Organization and Emergence of Semantic Knowledge: A Parallel-Distributed Processing Approach James L. McClelland Department of Psychology and Center for.
Long Term Memory LONG TERM MEMORY (LTM)  Variety of information stored in LTM:  The capital of Turkey  How to drive a car.
Adapted from by E.Day THE COGNITIVE APPROACH TYPES OF PROCESSING.
Chapter 9 Knowledge. Some Questions to Consider Why is it difficult to decide if a particular object belongs to a particular category, such as “chair,”
Big data classification using neural network
Psychology 209 – Winter 2017 January 31, 2017
What is cognitive psychology?
Psychology 209 – Winter 2017 Feb 28, 2017
Development and Disintegration of Conceptual Knowledge: A Parallel-Distributed Processing Approach James L. McClelland Department of Psychology and Center.
James L. McClelland SS 100, May 31, 2011
Does the Brain Use Symbols or Distributed Representations?
Knowledge Pt 2 Chapter 10 Knowledge Pt 2.
Cooperation of Complementary Learning Systems in Memory
Memory and Learning: Their Nature and Organization in the Brain
Emergence of Semantic Structure from Experience
Emergence of Semantics from Experience
Knowledge Pt 2 Chapter 10 Knowledge Pt 2.
Knowledge Pt 2 Chapter 10 Knowledge Pt 2.
CLS, Rapid Schema Consistent Learning, and Similarity-weighted Interleaved learning Psychology 209 Feb 26, 2019.
The Network Approach: Mind as a Web
Presentation transcript:

Development and Disintegration of Conceptual Knowledge: A Parallel-Distributed Processing Approach James L. McClelland Department of Psychology and Center for Mind, Brain, and Computation Stanford University

Representation is a pattern of activation distributed over neurons within and across brain areas. Bidirectional propagation of activation underlies the ability to bring these representations to mind from given inputs. The knowledge underlying propagation of activation is in the connections. language Parallel Distributed Processing Approach to Semantic Cognition

A Principle of Learning and Representation Learning and representation are sensitive to coherent covariation of properties across experiences.

What is Coherent Covariation? The tendency of properties of objects to co- occur in clusters. e.g. –Has wings –Can fly –Is light Or –Has roots –Has rigid cell walls –Can grow tall

Some Phenomena in Development Progressive differentiation of concepts Overgeneralization Illusory correlations

The Rumelhart Model

The Training Data: All propositions true of items at the bottom level of the tree, e.g.: Robin can {grow, move, fly}

Target output for ‘robin can’ input

ajaj aiai w ij net i =  a j w ij w ki Forward Propagation of Activation

 k ~ (t k -a k ) w ij  i ~   k w ki w ki ajaj Back Propagation of Error () Error-correcting learning: At the output layer:w ki =  k a i At the prior layer: w ij =  j a j … aiai

ExperienceExperience Early Later Later Still

Waves of differentiation reflect coherent covariation of properties across items. Patterns of coherent covariation are reflected in the principal components of the property covariance matrix. Figure shows attribute loadings on the first three principal components: –1. Plants vs. animals –2. Birds vs. fish –3. Trees vs. flowers Same color = features covary in component Diff color = anti-covarying features What Drives Progressive Differentiation?

Overgeneralization of Frequent Names to Similar Objects “dog” “goat” “tree”

Illusory Correlations Rochel Gelman found that children think that all animals have feet. –Even animals that look like small furry balls and don’t seem to have any feet at all. A tendency to over-generalize properties typical of a superordinate category at an intermediate point in development is characteristic of the PDP network.

A typical property that a particular object lacks e.g., pine has leaves An infrequent, atypical property

Sensitivity to Coherence Requires Convergence A A A

Main Points of the Talk Sensitivity to coherent covariation in an appropriately structured Parallel Distributed Processing system underlies the development of conceptual knowledge. Gradual degradation of the representations constructed through this developmental process underlies the pattern of semantic disintegration seen in semantic dementia.

Disintegration of Conceptual Knowledge in Semantic Dementia Progressive loss of specific knowledge of concepts, including their names, with preservation of general information Overgeneralization of frequent names Illusory correlations

Picture naming and drawing in Sem. Demantia

Grounding the Model in What we Know About The Organization of Semantic Knowledge in The Brain There is now evidence for specialized areas subserving many different kinds of semantic information. Semantic dementia results from progressive bilateral disintegration of the anterior temporal cortex. Rapid acquisition of new knowledge depends on medial temporal lobes, leaving long-term semantic knowledge intact. language

Proposed Architecture for the Organization of Semantic Memory color form motion action valance Temporal pole name Medial Temporal Lobe

Rogers et al (2005) model of semantic dementia Gradually learns through exposure to input patterns derived from norming studies. Representations in the temporal pole are acquired through the course of learning. After learning, the network can activate each other type of information from name or visual input. Representations undergo progressive differentiation as learning progresses. Damage to units within the temporal pole leads to the pattern of deficits seen in semantic dementia. nameassocfunction temporal pole vision

Severity of DementiaFraction of Neurons Destroyed omissionswithin categ. superord. Patient Data Simulation Results Errors in Naming for As a Function of Severity

Simulation of Delayed Copying Visual input is presented, then removed. After several time steps, pattern is compared to the pattern that was presented initially. Omissions and intrusions are scored for typicality nameassocfunction temporal pole vision

Omissions by feature typeIntrusions by feature type IF’s ‘camel’ DC’s ‘swan’ Simulation results

Main Points of the Talk Sensitivity to coherent covariation in an appropriately structured Parallel Distributed Processing system underlies the development of conceptual knowledge. Gradual degradation of the representations constructed through this developmental process underlies the pattern of semantic disintegration seen in semantic dementia.

Relationship between Semantic and Lexical Knowledge Patients with semantic dementia are typically ‘surface dyslexic’ –They make regularization errors reading low-frequency exception words like PINT They also make regularization errors in past- tense inflection, again especially with low- frequency exceptions like SWIM Tendency to regularize in both cases correlates with severity of semantic deficit.

Case Series Study by Patterson et al Tested 14 SD patients Assigned ‘Semantic Score’ based three tests. Reading HF&LF Reg. and Exc. Words Spelling HF&LF Reg. and Exc. Words Past Tense Inflection, HF&LF R&E Words Lexical Decision: fruit/frute, flute/fluit Object Decision (at right) Delayed Copying Test

Reg. Exc. Reg. Exc.

Words and Objects: Similar characteristics, similar degredation, similar mechanism Words and objects both have typical, idiosyncratic, and atypical properties. Connectionist networks that learn about such items pick up on the typical or regular properties and exhibit sensitivity to them. –Typical items and typical properties are more robustly represented than atypical items and properties. –Damage interferes with knowledge of idiosyncratic properties while sparing knowledge of more general properties. –Damage enhances a bias toward typicality, seen in both object and lexical decision with LF atypical items, and in other tasks.

Integrated Model of Semantic and Lexical Processing (Dilkina & McClelland, in progress) spelling sound function temporal pole vision Temporal pole mediates lexical as well as semantic knowledge. Lesions to the temporal pole produce corresponding deficits in semantic and lexical tasks. Lesions affecting one set of connections more than others can account for partial dissociations. Individual differences in network parameters and experience with particular tasks may also contribute to differences among patients. Ongoing work is addressing how well we can account for data from a wide range of tasks and patients within this framework.