Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. Emerging Tech
  4. News

A learning bias found in kids could help make A.I. technology better

Add as a preferred source on Google

The theory behind machine learning tools that are like neural networks is that they function and, more specifically, learn in a similar way to the human brain. Just as we discover the world through trial and error, so too does modern artificial intelligence. In practice, however, things are a bit different. There are aspects of childhood learning that machines can’t replicate — and they’re one of the things which, in many domains, make humans superior learners.

Researchers at New York University are working to change that. Researchers Kanishk Gandhi and Brenden Lake have explored how something called “mutual exclusivity bias,” which is present in kids, could help make A.I. better when it comes to learning tasks like understanding language.

Recommended Videos

“When children endeavor to learn a new word, they rely on inductive biases to narrow the space of possible meanings,” Gandhi, a graduate student in New York University’s Human & Machine Learning Lab, told Digital Trends. “Mutual exclusivity (ME) is a belief that children have that if an object has one name, it cannot have another. Mutual exclusivity helps us in understanding the meaning of a novel word in ambiguous contexts. For example, [if] children are told to ‘show me the dax’ when presented with a familiar and an unfamiliar object, they tend to pick the unfamiliar one.”

Image used with permission by copyright holder

The researchers wanted to explore a couple of ideas with their work. One was to investigate if deep learning algorithms trained using common learning paradigms would reason with mutual exclusivity. They also wanted to see if reasoning by mutual exclusivity would help learning algorithms in tasks that are commonly tackled using deep learning.

To carry out these investigations, the researchers first trained 400 neural networks to associate pairs of words with their meanings. The neurals nets were then tested on 10 words they had never seen before. They predicted that new words were likely to correspond to known meanings rather than unknown ones. This suggests that A.I. does not have an exclusivity bias. Next, the researchers analyzed datasets which help A.I. to translate languages. This helped to show that exclusivity bias would be beneficial to machines.

“Our results show that these characteristics are poorly matched to the structure of common machine learning tasks,” Gandhi continued. “ME can be used as a cue for generalization in common translation and classification tasks, especially in the early stages of training. We believe that exhibiting the bias would help learning algorithms to learn in faster and more adaptable ways.”

As Gandhi and Lake write in a paper describing their work: “Strong inductive biases allow children to learn in fast and adaptable ways … There is a compelling case for designing neural networks that reason by mutual exclusivity, which remains an open challenge.”

Luke Dormehl
I'm a UK-based tech writer covering Cool Tech at Digital Trends. I've also written for Fast Company, Wired, the Guardian…
The Adobe clones are real, but so is the work left to finish them
Seven free alternatives are out now, but their own documentation shows how much work remains
Nature, Outdoors, Sea

Free versions of Photoshop, Premiere Pro, and Lightroom are an easy sell to anyone tired of paying Adobe. Add a developer who says he vibe-coded replacements for seven of the company’s apps, and the triumphant headline practically writes itself. Adobe can presumably start clearing its desk.

Brandon Thomas’s Crafting Apps give that excitement something to work with. People can download the tools, inspect the source code, and find their way around familiar interfaces.

Read more
Getting health advice from AI chatbots comes with a problem doctors may never see
Researchers say AI companies should face the same liability as doctors for bad health advice
ChatGPT and pills on the same canvas.

AI chatbots have quietly become a go-to source for medical advice the extent that some are dangerously skipping real doctors. But when AI's health advice goes wrong, doctors may never see the exchange behind it.

Researchers from Binghamton University, Stanford, Texas A&M, and Indiana University published a paper in Nature Health examining what happens after a chatbot gives you bad health information. Their biggest concern is not just that chatbots can be wrong. It is that those mistakes often leave no trace for doctors, researchers, or regulators to catch.

Read more
AI companies expect a catastrophic AI incident and are reportedly preparing for the aftermath
A major AI cyberattack could disrupt essential services, damage public trust, and spark a political fight over regulations.
openai-anthropic-logo-on-screen

Leaders at OpenAI, Anthropic, and other AI companies are reportedly preparing for a potential AI disaster that could turn the public against artificial intelligence. According to an Axios report, industry leaders are privately running through possible scenarios for what happens after a catastrophic AI incident.

What kind of AI disaster are companies preparing for?

Read more