Statistical learning creates novel object associations via transitive relations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The visual system can readily extract statistical relationships between objects over space and time. What is more remarkable is the ability to form new associations between objects that have never co-occurred before. What cognitive mechanisms support the formation of these new associations? Here we propose that statistical learning not only produces knowledge about objects that have previously co-occurred, but also generates new connections between objects that have never directly appeared together. Observers viewed a continuous sequence of colors while performing a cover task. Unbeknownst to the observers, the colors were grouped into base pairs (e.g., A-B, B-C). We found that observers learned not only the base pairs, but also a novel pair of objects (A-C) that had never co-occurred before and could only be associated through transitive relations between the base pairs (Experiment 1). We extended the chain of associations by adding one more base pair (e.g., A-B, B-C, C-D), but this time the observers did not learn the novel pair (A-D), despite having successfully learned all the base pairs (Experiment 2). This reveals the limit in the transitive associations afforded by statistical learning. We also explored how transitive associations are formed across the categorical hierarchy. In Experiment 3, after viewing a sequence of city pairs (e.g., New York-London), observers automatically learned subordinate park pairs (Central Park-Hyde Park), and also superordinate country pairs (USA-UK). Importantly, none of the park pairs or country pairs had been presented previously, and could only be associated through the city pairs. However in Experiment 4, after viewing a sequence of park pairs, observers only showed successful learning of city pairs but not country pairs, reflecting the limit in the transitive associations across the categorical hierarchy. In sum, the findings suggest that statistical regularities provide a scaffold through which new associations between objects are automatically formed. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2016
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".