Researchers must often choose between Bayesian or neural network models of behavior, two paradigms with complementary strengths and weaknesses. An ideal paradigm would facilitate testing many kinds of representations and inductive biases; Bayesian models make this easy, while neural networks do not. Similarly, an ideal paradigm would avoid over-simplifications; neural networks make this easy, while Bayesian models do not. Here, we introduce Bayesian distillation with Behavioral Tuning (BBT) as an approach to getting the best of both traditions. BBT offers a simple recipe for model building: first, a neural network is trained to mimic a Bayesian model through synthetic data, and second, the network is fine-tuned on human behavior to capture additional structure and nuance. Across four case studies in human concept learning, we find that BBT outperforms traditional approaches at predicting human behavior while also revealing psychological insights, resulting in models that can both mimic Bayesian priors and capture heuristics and biases that violate simple modeling assumptions.
Solim LeGris, Philipp Mondorf, Jinran Jin, Akshay K. Jagadish, Brenden M. Lake, Todd M. Gureckis
原文摘要
Symbolic models offer a powerful account of cognition, but their scope has historically been limited by the need for hand-engineering and computational tractability. We show how advances in artificial intelligence (AI) can scale symbolic modeling and help overcome these engineering limitations. We introduce Behavior-Conditioned Symbolic Synthesis (BCSS)---an approach for automated search of interpretable, deterministic symbolic programs that verifiably reproduce behavior---and apply it to model both human and machine behavior across hundreds of challenging reasoning problems. Analyzing these programs reveals that both people and machines tend to oversimplify, adopt rules that are partial explanations for their observations, and misinfer dependencies between problem features. These shared signatures are modulated by available resources, with reasoning effort predicting the extent to which machines simplify and explain their observations. Together, these results point to underlying mechanisms reminiscent of satisficing in both people and machines, and illustrate how BCSS offers a general approach for interpreting and comparing rule-based reasoning of humans and black-box AI systems.