Word learning as category formation.

IF 2.9 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
PLoS ONE Pub Date : 2025-07-03 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0327615
Spencer Caplan
{"title":"Word learning as category formation.","authors":"Spencer Caplan","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0327615","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A fundamental question in word learning is how, given only evidence about what objects a word has previously referred to, children are able to generalize to the correct class. How does a learner end up knowing that \"poodle\" only picks out a specific subset of dogs rather than the broader class and vice versa? Numerous phenomena have been identified in guiding learner behavior such as the \"suspicious coincidence effect\" (SCE)-that an increase in the sample size of training objects facilitates more narrow (subordinate) word meanings. While SCE seems to support a class of models based in statistical inference, such rational behavior is, in fact, consistent with a range of algorithmic processes. Notably, the broadness of semantic generalizations is further affected by the temporal manner in which objects are presented-either simultaneously or sequentially. First, I evaluate the experimental evidence on the factors influencing generalization in word learning. A reanalysis of existing data demonstrates that both the number of training objects and their presentation-timing independently affect learning. This independent effect has been obscured by prior literature's focus on possible interactions between the two. Second, I present a computational model for learning that accounts for both sets of phenomena in a unified way. The Naïve Generalization Model (NGM) offers an explanation of word learning phenomena grounded in category formation. Under the NGM, learning is local and incremental, without the need to perform a global optimization over pre-specified hypotheses. This computational model is tested against human behavior on seven different experimental conditions for word learning, varying over presentation-timing, number, and hierarchical relation between training items. Looking both at qualitative parameter-independent behavior and quantitative parameter-tuned output, these results support the NGM and suggest that rational learning behavior may arise from local, mechanistic processes rather than global statistical inference.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":"20 7","pages":"e0327615"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12225872/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0327615","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A fundamental question in word learning is how, given only evidence about what objects a word has previously referred to, children are able to generalize to the correct class. How does a learner end up knowing that "poodle" only picks out a specific subset of dogs rather than the broader class and vice versa? Numerous phenomena have been identified in guiding learner behavior such as the "suspicious coincidence effect" (SCE)-that an increase in the sample size of training objects facilitates more narrow (subordinate) word meanings. While SCE seems to support a class of models based in statistical inference, such rational behavior is, in fact, consistent with a range of algorithmic processes. Notably, the broadness of semantic generalizations is further affected by the temporal manner in which objects are presented-either simultaneously or sequentially. First, I evaluate the experimental evidence on the factors influencing generalization in word learning. A reanalysis of existing data demonstrates that both the number of training objects and their presentation-timing independently affect learning. This independent effect has been obscured by prior literature's focus on possible interactions between the two. Second, I present a computational model for learning that accounts for both sets of phenomena in a unified way. The Naïve Generalization Model (NGM) offers an explanation of word learning phenomena grounded in category formation. Under the NGM, learning is local and incremental, without the need to perform a global optimization over pre-specified hypotheses. This computational model is tested against human behavior on seven different experimental conditions for word learning, varying over presentation-timing, number, and hierarchical relation between training items. Looking both at qualitative parameter-independent behavior and quantitative parameter-tuned output, these results support the NGM and suggest that rational learning behavior may arise from local, mechanistic processes rather than global statistical inference.

作为类别形成的词汇学习。
单词学习的一个基本问题是,在只给出一个单词先前指代的对象的证据的情况下,儿童如何能够将其归纳到正确的类别。为什么学习者最终知道“贵宾犬”只挑选了狗的一个特定子集,而不是更广泛的类别,反之亦然?在引导学习者行为方面,已经发现了许多现象,如“可疑巧合效应”(SCE),即训练对象的样本量增加会促进更狭窄(从属)的单词含义。虽然SCE似乎支持一类基于统计推断的模型,但事实上,这种理性行为与一系列算法过程是一致的。值得注意的是,语义泛化的广度进一步受到对象呈现的时间方式的影响——要么是同时呈现,要么是顺序呈现。首先,我评估了单词学习中影响泛化因素的实验证据。对现有数据的重新分析表明,训练对象的数量和它们的呈现时间都独立地影响学习。这种独立的影响被先前的文献对两者之间可能的相互作用的关注所掩盖。其次,我提出了一个学习的计算模型,它以统一的方式解释了这两组现象。Naïve概化模型(NGM)提供了一种基于类别形成的词学习现象的解释。在NGM下,学习是局部和增量的,不需要在预先指定的假设上执行全局优化。该计算模型在七个不同的单词学习实验条件下针对人类行为进行了测试,这些条件随训练项目之间的呈现时间、数量和层次关系而变化。从定性的参数独立行为和定量的参数调整输出来看,这些结果支持NGM,并表明理性的学习行为可能来自局部的机械过程,而不是全局的统计推断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE 生物-生物学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
14242
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides: * Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright * Fast publication times * Peer review by expert, practicing researchers * Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact * Community-based dialogue on articles * Worldwide media coverage
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信