{"title":"维度的维度。","authors":"Brett D Roads, Bradley C Love","doi":"10.1016/j.tics.2024.07.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cognitive scientists often infer multidimensional representations from data. Whether the data involve text, neuroimaging, neural networks, or human judgments, researchers frequently infer and analyze latent representational spaces (i.e., embeddings). However, the properties of a latent representation (e.g., prediction performance, interpretability, compactness) depend on the inference procedure, which can vary widely across endeavors. For example, dimensions are not always globally interpretable and the dimensionality of different embeddings may not be readily comparable. Moreover, the dichotomy between multidimensional spaces and purportedly richer representational formats, such as graph representations, is misleading. We review what the different notions of dimension in cognitive science imply for how these latent representations should be used and interpreted.</p>","PeriodicalId":49417,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Cognitive Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Dimensions of dimensionality.\",\"authors\":\"Brett D Roads, Bradley C Love\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tics.2024.07.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Cognitive scientists often infer multidimensional representations from data. Whether the data involve text, neuroimaging, neural networks, or human judgments, researchers frequently infer and analyze latent representational spaces (i.e., embeddings). However, the properties of a latent representation (e.g., prediction performance, interpretability, compactness) depend on the inference procedure, which can vary widely across endeavors. For example, dimensions are not always globally interpretable and the dimensionality of different embeddings may not be readily comparable. Moreover, the dichotomy between multidimensional spaces and purportedly richer representational formats, such as graph representations, is misleading. We review what the different notions of dimension in cognitive science imply for how these latent representations should be used and interpreted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49417,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trends in Cognitive Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trends in Cognitive Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2024.07.005\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Cognitive Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2024.07.005","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Cognitive scientists often infer multidimensional representations from data. Whether the data involve text, neuroimaging, neural networks, or human judgments, researchers frequently infer and analyze latent representational spaces (i.e., embeddings). However, the properties of a latent representation (e.g., prediction performance, interpretability, compactness) depend on the inference procedure, which can vary widely across endeavors. For example, dimensions are not always globally interpretable and the dimensionality of different embeddings may not be readily comparable. Moreover, the dichotomy between multidimensional spaces and purportedly richer representational formats, such as graph representations, is misleading. We review what the different notions of dimension in cognitive science imply for how these latent representations should be used and interpreted.
期刊介绍:
Essential reading for those working directly in the cognitive sciences or in related specialist areas, Trends in Cognitive Sciences provides an instant overview of current thinking for scientists, students and teachers who want to keep up with the latest developments in the cognitive sciences. The journal brings together research in psychology, artificial intelligence, linguistics, philosophy, computer science and neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences provides a platform for the interaction of these disciplines and the evolution of cognitive science as an independent field of study.