COULD KNOWLEDGE-BASED NEURAL LEARNING BE USEFUL IN DEVELOPMENTAL ROBOTICS? THE CASE OF KBCC
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The new field of developmental robotics faces the formidable challenge of implementing effective learning mechanisms in complex, dynamic environments. We make a case that knowledge-based learning algorithms might help to meet this challenge. A constructive neural learning algorithm, knowledge-based cascade-correlation (KBCC), autonomously recruits previously-learned networks in addition to the single hidden units recruited by ordinary cascade-correlation. This enables learning by analogy when adequate prior knowledge is available, learning by induction from examples when there is no relevant prior knowledge, and various combinations of analogy and induction. A review of experiments with KBCC indicates that recruitment of relevant existing knowledge typically speeds learning and sometimes enables learning of otherwise impossible problems. Some additional domains of interest to developmental robotics are identified in which knowledge-based learning seems essential. The characteristics of KBCC in relation to other knowledge-based neural learners and analogical reasoning are summarized as is the neurological basis for learning from knowledge. Current limitations of this approach and directions for future work are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it