Symbol Emergence as an Interpersonal Multimodal Categorization

Yoshinobu Hagiwara; Hiroyoshi Kobayashi; Akira Taniguchi; Tadahiro Taniguchi

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1905.13443

Symbol Emergence as an Interpersonal Multimodal Categorization

Yoshinobu Hagiwara·Hiroyoshi Kobayashi·Akira Taniguchi·Tadahiro Taniguchi

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This study focuses on category formation for individual agents and the dynamics of symbol emergence in a multi-agent system through semiotic communication. Semiotic communication is defined, in this study, as the generation and interpretation of signs associated with the categories formed through the agent's own sensory experience or by exchange of signs with other agents. From the viewpoint of language evolution and symbol emergence, organization of a symbol system in a multi-agent system is considered as a bottom-up and dynamic process, where individual agents share the meaning of signs and categorize sensory experience. A constructive computational model can explain the mutual dependency of the two processes and has mathematical support that guarantees a symbol system's emergence and sharing within the multi-agent system. In this paper, we describe a new computational model that represents symbol emergence in a two-agent system based on a probabilistic generative model for multimodal categorization. It models semiotic communication via a probabilistic rejection based on the receiver's own belief. We have found that the dynamics by which cognitively independent agents create a symbol system through their semiotic communication can be regarded as the inference process of a hidden variable in an interpersonal multimodal categorizer, if we define the rejection probability based on the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm. The validity of the proposed model and algorithm for symbol emergence is also verified in an experiment with two agents observing daily objects in the real-world environment. The experimental results demonstrate that our model reproduces the phenomena of symbol emergence, which does not require a teacher who would know a pre-existing symbol system. Instead, the multi-agent system can form and use a symbol system without having pre-existing categories.

Explore related subjects

cs.CL

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Yoshinobu Hagiwara, Hiroyoshi Kobayashi, Akira Taniguchi, Tadahiro Taniguchi. 2019-05-31. Symbol Emergence as an Interpersonal Multimodal Categorization. https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.13443

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Universal Topological Regularity of Syntactic Structures

Despite their widespread use, the principles governing the organisation of syntactic dependency trees remain poorly understood. I analyse dependency trees from 124 typologically, genetically, and geographically diverse languages. Their topology departs systematically from randomness. Relative to uniformly sampled random trees, dependency trees exhibit greater structural robustness and lower branching heterogeneity. I propose that these universal regularities emerge naturally from incremental grammatical encoding. I model this process using sublinear preferential attachment. The model accurately reproduces the observed topology. More generally, the results demonstrate how a universal statistical property of syntax can emerge from a simple, cognitively motivated generative process. They further illustrate a broader principle of efficiency by construction: communicatively efficient syntactic structures can emerge without direct optimisation for communication.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

An Incomplete Loop: Deductive, Inductive, and Abductive Reasoning in Language Models

Modern language models (LMs) can learn to perform new tasks in different ways: in instruction following, the target task is described explicitly in natural language; in few-shot prompting, the task is specified implicitly with a small number of examples; in instruction inference, LMs are presented with in-context examples and are then prompted to generate a natural language task description before making predictions. Each of these procedures may be thought of as invoking a different form of reasoning: instruction following involves deductive reasoning, few-shot prompting involves inductive reasoning, and instruction inference involves abductive reasoning. How do these different capabilities relate? Across four LMs (from the gpt and llama families) and two learning problems (involving arithmetic functions and machine translation) we find a strong dissociation between the different types of reasoning: LMs can sometimes learn effectively from few-shot prompts even when they are unable to explain their own prediction rules; conversely, they sometimes infer useful task descriptions while completely failing to learn from human-generated descriptions of the same task. Our results highlight the non-systematic nature of reasoning even in some of today's largest LMs, and underscore the fact that very different learning mechanisms may be invoked by seemingly similar prompting procedures.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Thinking beyond the anthropomorphic paradigm benefits LLM research

Anthropomorphism, or the attribution of human traits to technology, is an automatic and unconscious response that occurs even in those with advanced technical expertise. In this position paper, we analyze hundreds of thousands of research articles to present empirical evidence of the prevalence and growth of anthropomorphic terminology in research on large language models (LLMs). We argue for challenging the deeper assumptions reflected in this terminology -- which, though often useful, may inadvertently constrain LLM development -- and broadening beyond them to open new pathways for understanding and improving LLMs. Specifically, we identify and examine five anthropomorphic assumptions that shape research across the LLM development lifecycle. For each assumption (e.g., that LLMs must use natural language for reasoning, or that they should be evaluated on benchmarks originally meant for humans), we demonstrate empirical, non-anthropomorphic alternatives that remain under-explored yet offer promising directions for LLM research and development.

cs.CL↗