Inferential Learning of Serial Order of Perceptual Categories by Rhesus Monkeys ( <i>Macaca mulatta</i> )
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Category learning in animals is typically trained explicitly, in most instances by varying the exemplars of a single category in a matching-to-sample task. Here, we show that male rhesus macaques can learn categories by a transitive inference paradigm in which novel exemplars of five categories were presented throughout training. Instead of requiring decisions about a constant set of repetitively presented stimuli, we studied the macaque9s ability to determine the relative order of multiple exemplars of particular stimuli that were rarely repeated. Ordinal decisions generalized both to novel stimuli and, as a consequence, to novel pairings. Thus, we showed that rhesus monkeys could learn to categorize on the basis of implied ordinal position, without prior matching-to-sample training, and that they could then make inferences about category order. Our results challenge the plausibility of association models of category learning and broaden the scope of the transitive inference paradigm. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The cognitive abilities of nonhuman animals are of enduring interest to scientists and the general public because they blur the dividing line between human and nonhuman intelligence. Categorization and sequence learning are highly abstract cognitive abilities each in their own right. This study is the first to provide evidence that visual categories can be ordered serially by macaque monkeys using a behavioral paradigm that provides no explicit feedback about category or serial order. These results strongly challenge accounts of learning based on stimulus–response associations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".