Abstracts: https://sites.google.com/site/analogylist/analogical-minds-seminar/analogy-and-law-symposium

Analogical reasoning is a common reasoning tool for learning and problem-solving. Existing research has extensively studied children’s reasoning when comparing, or choosing from ready-made analogies. Relatively less is known about how children come up with analogies in authentic learning environments. Design education provides a suitable context to investigate how children generate analogies for creative learning purposes. Meanwhile, the frequent use of visual analogies in design provides an additional opportunity to understand the role of spatial reasoning in design-by-analogy. Spatial reasoning is one of the most studied human cognitive factors and is critical to the learning of science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM). There is growing interest in exploring the interplay between analogical reasoning and spatial reasoning. In this talk, I will share qualitative findings from a case study, where a class of 11-to-12-year-olds in the Netherlands participated in a biomimicry design project. These findings illustrate (1) practical ways to support children’s analogical reasoning in the ideation process and (2) the potential role of spatial reasoning as seen in children mapping form-function relationships in nature analogically and adaptively to those in human designs.

In cognitive development, learning more than the input provides is a central challenge. This challenge is especially evident in learning the meaning of numbers. Integers – and the quantities they denote – are potentially infinite, as are the fractional values between every integer. Yet children’s experiences of numbers are necessarily finite. Analogy is a powerful learning mechanism for children to learn novel, abstract concepts from only limited input. However, retrieving proper analogy requires cognitive supports. In this talk, I seek to propose and examine number lines as a mathematical schema of the number system to facilitate both the development of rational number understanding and analogical reasoning. To examine these hypotheses, I will present a series of educational intervention studies with third-to-fifth graders. Results showed that a short, unsupervised intervention of spatial alignment between integers and fractions on number lines produced broad and durable gains in fractional magnitudes. Additionally, training on conceptual knowledge of fractions – that fractions denote magnitude and can be placed on number lines – facilitates explicit analogical reasoning. Together, these studies indicate that analogies can play an important role in rational number learning with the help of number lines as schemas. These studies shed light on helpful practices in STEM education curricula and instructions.

In this presentation, we will discuss adaptations of historical examples of mathematical research to bring out some of the intuitive judgments that accompany the working practice of mathematicians when reasoning by analogy. The main epistemological claim that we will aim to illustrate is that a central part of mathematical training consists in developing a quasi-perceptual capacity to distinguish superficial from deep analogies. We think of this capacity as an instance of Hadamard’s (1954) discriminating faculty of the mathematical mind, whereby one is led to distinguish between mere “hookings” (77) and “relay-results” (80): on the one hand, suggestions or ‘hints’, useful to raise questions but not to back up conjectures; on the other, more significant discoveries, which can be used as an evidentiary source in further mathematical inquiry. In the second part of the presentation, we will present some recent applications of this epistemological framework to mathematics education projects for middle and high schools in Italy.

In this talk, I’ll consider how new ideas emerge from old ones via the process of conceptual blending. I’ll start by considering analogical reasoning in problem solving and the role conceptual blending plays in these problem-solving contexts. Then I’ll consider blending in multi-modal contexts, including timelines, memes (viz. image macros), and, if time allows, zoom meetings. I suggest mappings analogy researchers have traditionally considered superficial are often important for the development of novel abstractions. Likewise, the analogue portion of multimodal blends anchors their generative capacity. Overall, these observations underscore the extent to which meaning is a socially distributed process whose intermediate products are stored in cognitive artifacts such as text and digital images.

Vector-space models are used frequently to compare similarity and dimensionality among entity concepts. What happens when we apply these models to relational concepts? What is the evidence that such models do apply to relational concepts? If we use such a model, then one implication is that maximizing surface feature variation should improve relational concept learning. For example, in STEM instruction, the effectiveness of teaching by analogy is often limited by students’ focus on superficial features of the source and target exemplars. However, in contrast to the prediction of the vector-space computational model, the strategy of progressive alignment (moving from perceptually similar to different targets) has been suggested to address this issue (Gentner & Hoyos, 2017), and human behavioral evidence has shown benefits from progressive alignment. Here I will present some preliminary data that supports the computational approach. Participants were explicitly instructed to match stimuli based on relations while perceptual similarity of stimuli varied parametrically. We found that lower perceptual similarity reduced accurate relational matching. This finding demonstrates that perceptual similarity may interfere with relational judgements, but also hints at why progressive alignment maybe effective. These are preliminary, exploratory data and I to hope receive feedback on the framework and to start a discussion in a group on the utility of vector-space models for relational concepts in general.

Following the seminal structure mapping theory by Dedre Gentner, the process of mapping the corresponding structures of relations defining two analogs has been understood as a key component of analogy making. However, not without a merit, in recent years some semantic, pragmatic, and perceptual aspects of analogy mapping attracted primary attention of analogy researchers. For almost a decade, our team have been re-focusing on relational structure mapping, investigating its potential mechanisms across various analogy tasks, both abstract (semantically-lean) and more concrete (semantically-rich), using diverse methods (behavioral, correlational, eye-tracking, EEG). I will present the overview of our main findings. They suggest that structure mapping (1) consists of an incremental construction of the ultimate mental representation, (2) which strongly depends on working memory resources and reasoning ability, (3) even if as little as a single trivial relation needs to be represented mentally. The effective mapping (4) is related to the slowest brain rhythm – the delta band (around 2-3 Hz) – suggesting its highly integrative nature. Finally, we have developed a new task – Graph Mapping – which involves pure mapping of two explicit relational structures. This task allows for precise investigation and manipulation of the mapping process in experiments, as well as is one of the best proxies of individual differences in reasoning ability. Structure mapping is as crucial to analogy as Gentner advocated, and perhaps it is crucial to cognition in general.

Can nonhuman animals perceive the relation-between-relations? This intriguing question has been studied over the last 40 years; nonetheless, the extent to which nonhuman species can do so remains controversial. Here, I review empirical evidence suggesting that pigeons, parrots, crows, and baboons join humans in reliably acquiring and transferring relational matching-to-sample (RMTS). Many theorists consider that RMTS captures the essence of analogy, because basic to analogy is appreciating the ‘relation between relations.’ Factors affecting RMTS performance include: prior training experience, the entropy of the sample stimulus, and whether the items that serve as sample stimuli can also serve as choice stimuli.

Dominant theories of analogical thinking postulate that making an analogy consists in discovering that two superficially different situations share isomorphic systems of similar relations. According to this perspective, the comparison between the two situations may eventually lead to the construction of a schema, which retains the structural aspects they share and deletes their specific contents. We have developed a new approach to analogical thinking, whose purpose is to explain a particular type of analogies: those in which the analogs are exemplars of a schema-governed category (e.g., two instances of robbery). As compared to standard analogies, these comparisons are noteworthy in that a well-established schema (the schema-governed category) mediates each one of the subprocesses involved in analogical thinking. We argue that the category assignment approach is able to provide a better account of how the analogical subprocesses of retrieval, mapping, re-representation, evaluation and inference generation are carried out during the processing of this specific kind of analogies. The arguments presented are accompanied by brief descriptions of some of the studies that provided support for this approach.

What do people do when they comprehend language in discourse? According to many psychologists, they build and maintain cognitive representations of utterances in four complementary mental models for discourse that interact with each other: the surface text, the text base, the situation model, and the context model. When people encounter metaphors in these utterances, they need to incorporate them into each of these mental representations for the discourse. Since influential metaphor theories define metaphor as a form of (figurative) analogy, involving cross-domain mapping of a smaller or greater extent, the general expectation has been that metaphor comprehension is also based on analogizing. This expectation, however, has been partly borne out by the data, but not completely. There is no one-to-one relationship between metaphor as (conceptual) structure (analogy) and metaphor as (psychological) process (analogizing). According to Deliberate Metaphor Theory (DMT), only some metaphors are handled by analogy. Instead, most metaphors are presumably handled by lexical disambiguation. This is a hypothesis that brings together most metaphor research in a provocatively new way: it means that most metaphors are not processed metaphorically, which produces a paradox of metaphor. In this talk I will sketch out how this paradox arises and how it can be resolved by a new version of DMT, which I have described in my forthcoming book Slowing metaphor down: Updating Deliberate Metaphor Theory (currently under review). In this theory, the distinction between, but also the relation between, analogy in metaphorical structure versus analogy in metaphorical process is of central importance.

Analogical reasoning –learning about new things by relating it to previous knowledge– lies at the heart of human intelligence and creativity and forms the core of educational practice. Children start creating and using analogies early on, making incredible progress moving from associative processes to successful analogical reasoning. For example, if we ask a four-year-old “Horse belongs to stable like chicken belongs to …?” they may use association and reply “egg”, whereas older children will likely give the intended relational response “chicken coop” (or other term to refer to a chicken’s home). Interestingly, despite state-of-the-art AI-language models having superhuman encyclopedic knowledge and superior memory and computational power, our pilot studies show that these large language models often make mistakes providing associative rather than relational responses to verbal analogies. For example, when we asked four- to eight-year-olds to solve the analogy “body is to feet as tree is to …?” they responded “roots” without hesitation, but large language models tend to provide more associative responses such as “leaves”. In this study we examine the similarities and differences between children's and six large language models' (Dutch/multilingual models: RobBERT, BERT-je, M-BERT, GPT-2, M-GPT, Word2Vec and Fasttext) responses to verbal analogies extracted from an online adaptive learning environment, where >14,000 7-12 year-olds from the Netherlands solved 20 or more items from a database of 900 Dutch language verbal analogies.

Analogies between old and new concepts are common during classroom instruction. While previous studies of transfer focus on how features of initial learning guide later transfer to new problem solving, less is known about how to best support analogical transfer from previous learning while children are engaged in new learning episodes. Such research may have important implications for teaching and learning in mathematics, which often includes analogies between old and new information. Some existing research promotes supporting learners' explicit connections across old and new information within an analogy. In this talk, I will present evidence that instructors can invite implicit analogical reasoning through warm-up activities designed to activate relevant prior knowledge. Warm-up activities "close the transfer space" between old and new learning without additional direct instruction.

Relational thinking involves comparing abstract relationships between mental representations that vary in complexity; however, this complexity is rarely made explicit during everyday comparisons. This study explored how people naturally navigate relational complexity and interference using a novel relational match-to-sample (RMTS) task with both minimal and relationally directed instruction to observe changes in performance across three levels of relational complexity: perceptual, analogy, and system mappings. Individual working memory and relational abilities were examined to understand RMTS performance and susceptibility to interfering relational structures. Trials were presented without practice across four blocks and participants received feedback after each attempt to guide learning. Experiment 1 instructed participants to select the target that best matched the sample, while Experiment 2 additionally directed participants’ attention to same and different relations. Participants in Experiment 2 demonstrated improved performance when solving analogical mappings, suggesting that directing attention to relational characteristics affected behavior. Higher performing participants—those above chance performance on the final block of system mappings—solved more analogical RMTS problems and had greater visuospatial working memory, abstraction, verbal analogy, and scene analogy scores compared to lower performers. Lower performers were less dynamic in their performance across blocks and demonstrated negative relationships between analogy and system mapping accuracy, suggesting increased interference between these relational structures. Participant performance on RMTS problems did not change monotonically with relational complexity, suggesting that increases in relational complexity places nonlinear demands on working memory. We argue that competing relational information causes additional interference, especially in individuals with lower executive function abilities.

Vocabulary learning applications like Duolingo have millions of users around the world, but yet are based on very simple heuristics to choose teaching material to provide to their users. In this presentation, we will discuss the possibility to develop more advanced artificial teachers, which would be based on modeling of the learner’s inner characteristics. In the case of teaching vocabulary, understanding how the learner memorizes is enough. When it comes to picking grammar exercises, it becomes essential to assess how the learner reasons, in particular by analogy. This second application will illustrate how analogical and case-based reasoning can be employed in an alternative way in education: not as the teaching algorithm, but as a part of the learner’s model.

Space is the universal donor for relations" (Gentner, 2014). This quote is the foundation of my talk. I will explore how and why visual representations and analogies are related, and why. I will also explore how considering the relation between analogy and spatial reasoning can shed light on why and how spatial thinking is correlated with learning in STEM fields. For example, I will consider children’s numbers sense and learning of the number line from the perspective of analogical reasoning.

How and why are analogies spontaneously generated? Despite the prominence of analogy in learning and reasoning, there is little research on whether and how analogy is spontaneously generated in everyday settings. Here we fill this gap by gathering parents' answers to children's real questions, and examining analogy use in parental explanations. Study 1 found that parents used analogy spontaneously in their explanations, despite no prompt nor mention of analogy in the instruction. Study 2 found that these analogical explanations were rated highly by parents, schoolteachers, and university students alike. In Study 3, six-year-olds also rated good analogical explanations highly, but unlike their parents, did not rate them higher than causal, non-analogical explanations. We discuss what makes an analogy a good explanation, and how theories from both explanation and analogy research explain one’s motivation for spontaneously generating analogies.

Engineering designers practice design-by-analogy (DbA) during concept generation to retrieve knowledge from external sources or memory as inspiration to solve design problems. DbA is a tool for innovation that involves retrieving analogies from a source domain and transferring the knowledge to a target domain. While DbA produces innovative results, designers often come up with analogies by themselves or through serendipitous, random encounters. Computational support systems for searching analogies have been developed to facilitate DbA in systematic design practice. However, many systems have focused on a query-based approach, in which a designer inputs a keyword or a query function and is returned a set of algorithmically determined stimuli. In this presentation, a new analogical retrieval process that leverages a visual interaction technique is introduced. It enables designers to explore a space of analogies, rather than be constrained by what’s retrieved by a query-based algorithm. With an exploration-based DbA tool, designers have the potential to uncover more useful and unexpected inspiration for innovative design solutions.

Prior studies of A:B::C:D verbal analogies have identified several factors that affect performance, including the semantic similarity between source and target domains (semantic distance), the semantic association between the C-term and incorrect answers (distracter salience), and the type of relations between word pairs (e.g., categorical, compositional, and causal). However, it is unclear how these stimulus properties affect performance when utilized together. Moreover, how do these item factors interact with individual differences such as crystallized intelligence and creative thinking? Several studies reveal interactions among these item and individual difference factors impacting verbal analogy performance. For example, a three-way interaction demonstrated that the effects of semantic distance and distracter salience had a greater impact on performance for compositional and causal relations than for categorical ones (Jones, Kmiecik, Irwin, & Morrison, 2022). Implications for analogy theories and future directions are discussed.

Individuals vary widely in how they categorize novel phenomena. This individual variation has led canonical theories in cognitive and social science to suggest that communication in large social networks leads populations to construct divergent category systems. Yet, anthropological data indicates that large, independent societies consistently arrive at similar categories across a range of topics. How is it possible for diverse populations, consisting of individuals with significant variation in how they view the world, to independently construct similar categories? Through a series of online experiments, I show how large communication networks within cultures can promote the formation of similar categories across cultures. For this investigation, I designed an online “Grouping Game” to observe how people construct categories in both small and large populations when tasked with grouping together the same novel and ambiguous images. I replicated this design for English-speaking subjects in the U.S. and Mandarin-speaking subjects in China. In both cultures, solitary individuals and small social groups produced highly divergent category systems. Yet, large social groups separately and consistently arrived at highly similar categories both within and across cultures. These findings are accurately predicted by a simple mathematical model of critical mass dynamics. Altogether, I show how large communication networks can filter lexical diversity among individuals to produce replicable society-level patterns, yielding unexpected implications for cultural evolution. In particular, I discuss how participants in both cultures readily harnessed analogies when categorizing novel stimuli, and I examine the role of communication networks in promoting cross-cultural similarities in analogy-making as the key engine of category formation.

Children need inference in order to learn the meanings of words. They must infer the referent from the situation in which a target word is said. Furthermore, to be able to use the word in other situations, they also need to infer what other referents the word can be generalized to. As verbs refer to relations between arguments, verb learning requires relational analogical inference, something which is challenging to young children. To overcome this difficulty, young children recruit a diverse range of cues in their inference of verb meanings, including, but not limited to, syntactic cues and social and pragmatic cues as well as statistical cues. They also utilize perceptual similarity (object similarity) in progressive alignment to extract relational verb meanings and further to gain insights about relational verb meanings. However, just having a list of these cues is not useful: the cues must be selected, combined, and coordinated to produce the optimal interpretation in a particular context. This process involves abductive reasoning, similar to what scientists do to form hypotheses from a range of facts or evidence. In this talk, I discuss how children use a chain of inferences to learn meanings of verbs. I consider not only the process of analogical mapping and progressive alignment, but also how children use abductive inference to find the source of analogy and gain insights into the general principles underlying verb learning. I also present recent findings from my laboratory that show that prelinguistic human infants use a rudimentary form of abductive reasoning, which enables the first step of word learning.

The cerebellum resembles a feedforward, three-layer network of neurons in which the “hidden layer” consists of Purkinje cells (P-cells) and the output layer consists of deep cerebellar nucleus (DCN) neurons. In this analogy, the output of each DCN neuron is a prediction that is compared with the actual observation, resulting in an error signal that originates in the inferior olive. Efficient learning requires that the error signal reach the DCN neurons, as well as the P-cells that project onto them. However, this basic rule of learning is violated in the cerebellum: the olivary projections to the DCN are weak, particularly in adulthood. Instead, an extraordinarily strong signal is sent from the olive to the P-cells, producing complex spikes. Curiously, P-cells are grouped into small populations that converge onto single DCN neurons. Why are the P-cells organized in this way, and what is the membership criterion of each population? Here, I apply elementary mathematics from machine learning and consider the fact that P-cells that form a population exhibit a special property: they can synchronize their complex spikes, which in turn suppress activity of DCN neuron they project to. Thus complex spikes cannot only act as a teaching signal for a P-cell, but through complex spike synchrony, a P-cell population may act as a surrogate teacher for the DCN neuron that produced the erroneous output. It appears that grouping of P-cells into small populations that share a preference for error satisfies a critical requirement of efficient learning: providing error information to the output layer neuron (DCN) that was responsible for the error, as well as the hidden layer neurons (P-cells) that contributed to it. This population coding may account for several remarkable features of behavior during learning, including multiple timescales, protection from erasure, and spontaneous recovery of memory.

Analogical reasoning is one of the most complex cognitive functions in humans that allows abstract thinking, high-level reasoning, and learning. Based on analogical reasoning, one can extract an abstract and general concept (i.e., an analogy schema) from a familiar situation and apply it to a new context or domain (i.e., analogy transfer). These processes allow us to solve problems we never encountered before and generate new ideas. However, the place of analogy transfer in problem solving mechanisms is unclear. This presentation will describe several experiments with three main findings. First, we show how analogy transfer facilitates problem-solving, replicating existing empirical data largely based on the radiation/fortress problems with four new riddles. Second, we propose a new experimental task that allows us to quantify analogy transfer. Finally, using science network methodology, we show how restructuring the mental representation of a problem can predict successful solving of an analogous problem. These results shed new light on the cognitive mechanism underlying solution transfer by analogy and provide a new tool to quantify individual abilities.

Studies reported the effects of different types and different levels of abstraction of analogical stimuli on designers. However, specific, single visual analogical stimuli on the effects of designers have not been reported. We define this type of stimuli as specific analogical stimuli. We used the extended linkography method to analyze the facilitating and limiting effects of specific analogical stimuli and free association analogical stimuli (nonspecific analogical stimuli) on the students' creativity at different design levels. Through an empirical study, we explored the differences in the effects of specific analogy stimuli on the students at different design levels. It clarifies the use of analogical stimuli in design and the teaching of analogical design methods in design education.

Analogical reasoning is related to everyday learning and scholastic learning and is a robust predictor of g. Therefore, children's ability to reason by analogy is often measured in a school context to gain insight into children's cognitive and intellectual functioning. Often, the ability to reason by analogy is measured by means of conventional, static instruments. Static tests are criticised by researchers and practitioners to provide an overview of what individuals have learned in the past and for this reason are assumed not to tap into the potential for learning, based on Vygotsky's zone of proximal development. This seminar will focus on children's potential for reasoning by analogy, as measured by means of a dynamic test, which has a test-training-test design. In so doing, the potential relationship between dynamic test outcomes and executive functioning will be explored.

Building conceptual abstractions from sensory information and then reasoning about them is central to human intelligence. Abstract reasoning both relies on, and is facilitated by, our ability to make analogies about concepts from known domains to novel domains. Structure Mapping Theory of human analogical reasoning posits that analogical mappings rely on (higher-order) relations and not on the sensory content of the domain. This enables humans to reason systematically about novel domains, a problem with which machine learning (ML) models tend to struggle. We introduce a two-stage neural net framework, which we label Neural Structure Mapping (NSM), to learn visual analogies from Raven's Progressive Matrices, an abstract visual reasoning test of fluid intelligence. Our framework uses (1) a multi-task visual relationship encoder to extract constituent concepts from raw visual input in the source domain, and (2) a neural module net analogy inference engine to reason compositionally about the inferred relation in the target domain. Our NSM approach (a) isolates the relational structure from the source domain with high accuracy, and (b) successfully utilizes this structure for analogical reasoning in the target domain.

This talk will focus on our lab's extensive research on understanding and enhancing creative analogical reasoning. I will cover the development of the analogy finding matrix task, evidence for conscious augmentation of creative state during this task, and the real-world implications this ability has for college STEM education. I will also discuss recent research aimed at enhancing performance on this creative analogical reasoning task using both transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS).

Social learning and analogical reasoning both provide exponential opportunities for learning. These skills have largely been studied independently, but my future research asks how combining skills across previously independent domains could add up to more than the sum of their parts. Analogical reasoning allows individuals to transfer learning between contexts and opens up infinite opportunities for innovation and knowledge creation. Its origins and development, so far, have largely been studied in purely cognitive domains. Constraining analogical development to non-social domains may mistakenly lead researchers to overlook its early roots and limit ideas about its potential scope. Building a bridge between social learning and analogy could facilitate identification of the origins of analogical reasoning and broaden its far-reaching potential. In this talk, I propose that the early emergence of social learning, its saliency, and its meaningful context for young children provides a springboard for learning. In addition to providing a strong foundation for early analogical reasoning, the social domain provides an avenue for scaling up analogies in order to learn to learn from others via increasingly complex and broad routes.

Analogy offers a new interpretation of a common concern in ethics: whether decision making includes or excludes a consideration of moral issues. This is often discussed as the moral awareness of decision makers and considered a motivational concern. The possible new interpretation is that moral awareness is in part a matter of expertise. Some failures of moral awareness can then be understood as stemming from novicehood. Studies of analogical transfer are consistent with the possibility that moral awareness is in part a matter of expertise, that as a result motivation is less helpful than some prior theorizing would predict, and that many adults are not as expert in the domain of ethics as one might hope. The possibility of expert knowledge of ethical principles leads to new questions and opportunities.

Although analogical reasoning has been assumed to involve insight and its associated “aha!” experience, the relationship between these phenomena has never been directly probed empirically. In this study we investigated the relationship between representational change and the “aha!” experience during analogical reasoning. A novel set of verbal analogy stimuli were developed for use as an insight task. Across two experiments, participants reported significantly stronger aha moments and showed greater evidence of representational change on trials with more semantically distant analogies. Further, the strength of reported aha moments was correlated with the degree to which participants’ descriptions of the analogies changed over the course of each trial. Lastly, we probed the individual differences associated with a tendency to report stronger "aha" experiences, particularly related to mood, curiosity, and reward responsiveness. The findings shed light on the affective components of analogical reasoning and suggest that measuring affective responses during such tasks may elucidate novel insights into the mechanisms of creative analogical reasoning.

There has been a recent surge of interest in the question of whether and how deep learning algorithms might be capable of abstract reasoning, much of which has centered around datasets based on Raven’s Progressive Matrices (RPM), a visual analogy problem set commonly employed to assess fluid intelligence. This has led to the development of algorithms that are capable of solving RPM-like problems directly from pixel-level inputs. However, these algorithms require extensive direct training on analogy problems, and typically generalize poorly to novel problem types. This is in stark contrast to human reasoners, who are capable of solving RPM and other analogy problems zero-shot — that is, with no direct training on those problems. Indeed, it’s this capacity for zero-shot reasoning about novel problem types, i.e. fluid intelligence, that RPM was originally designed to measure. I will present some results from our recent efforts to model this capacity for zero-shot reasoning, based on an extension of a recently proposed approach to analogical mapping we refer to as Probabilistic Analogical Mapping (PAM). Our RPM model uses deep learning to extract attributed graph representations from pixel-level inputs, and then performs alignment of objects between source and target analogs using gradient descent to optimize a graph-matching objective. This extended version of PAM features a number of new capabilities that underscore the flexibility of the overall approach, including 1) the capacity to discover solutions that emphasize either object similarity or relation similarity, based on the demands of a given problem, 2) the ability to extract a schema representing the overall abstract pattern that characterizes a problem, and 3) the ability to directly infer the answer to a problem, rather than relying on a set of possible answer choices. This work suggests that PAM is a promising framework for modeling human zero-shot reasoning.

In the past several years, I have been involved in building a biologically realistic model of the monkey visual cortex. Work on one of the input layers (4Ca) of the primary visual cortex (V1) is now nearly complete, and I would like to share some of what I have learned with the community. After a brief overview of the model and its capabilities, I would like to focus on three sets of results that represent three different aspects of the modeling. They are: (i) emergent E-I dynamics in local circuits; (ii) how visual cortical neurons acquire their ability to detect edges and directions of motion, and (iii) a view across the cortical surface: nonequilibrium steady states (in analogy with statistical mechanics) and beyond.

Analogies are widely used by teachers and coaches of different movement disciplines, serving a role during the learning phase of a new skill, and honing one’s performance to a competitive level. In previous studies, analogies improved motor control in various tasks and across age groups. Our study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of analogies throughout the learning process, using kinematic measures for an in-depth analysis. We tested whether applying analogies can shorten the motor learning process and induce insight and skill improvement in tasks that usually demand many hours of practice. The experiment included a drawing task, in which subjects were asked to connect four dots into a closed shape, and a mirror game, in which subjects tracked an oval that moved across the screen. After establishing a baseline, subjects were given an analogy, explicit instructions, or no further instruction. We compared their improvement in overall skill, accuracy, and speed. Subjects in the analogy and explicit groups improved their performance in the drawing task, while significant differences were found in the mirror game only for slow movements between analogy and controls. In conclusion, analogies are an important tool for teachers and coaches, and more research is needed to understand how to apply them for maximum results. They can rapidly change motor control and strategy but may also affect only some aspects of a movement and not others. Careful thought is needed to construct an effective analogy that encompasses relevant movement facets, as well as the practitioner’s personal background and experience.

Humans can adapt to a novel task on our first try. By contrast, artificial intelligence systems often require immense amounts of data to adapt. In this talk, I will discuss my recent work (https://www.pnas.org/content/117/52/32970) on creating deep learning systems that can adapt on their first try by exploiting relationships between tasks. Specifically, the approach is based on transforming a representation for a known task to produce a representation for the novel task, by inferring and then using a higher order function that captures a relationship between the tasks. This approach can be interpreted as a type of analogical reasoning. I will show that task transformation can allow systems to adapt to novel tasks on their first try in domains ranging from card games, to mathematical objects, to image classification and reinforcement learning. I will discuss the analogical interpretation of this approach, an analogy between levels of abstraction within the model architecture that I refer to as homoiconicity, and what this work might suggest about using deep-learning models to infer analogies more generally.

In recent years, artificial neural networks have demonstrated human-like or super-human performance in many tasks including image or speech recognition, natural language processing (NLP), playing Go, chess, poker and video-games. One remarkable feature of the resulting models is that they can develop very intuitive latent representations of their inputs. In these latent spaces, simple linear operations tend to give meaningful results, as in the well-known analogy QUEEN-WOMAN+MAN=KING. We postulate that human brain representations share essential properties with these deep learning latent spaces. To verify this, we test whether artificial latent spaces can serve as a good model for decoding brain activity. We report improvements over state-of-the-art performance for reconstructing seen and imagined face images from fMRI brain activation patterns, using the latent space of a GAN (Generative Adversarial Network) model coupled with a Variational AutoEncoder (VAE). With another GAN model (BigBiGAN), we can decode and reconstruct natural scenes of any category from the corresponding brain activity. Our results suggest that deep learning can produce high-level representations approaching those found in the human brain. Finally, I will discuss whether these deep learning latent spaces could be relevant to the study of consciousness.

Analogies, broadly defined, map novel concepts onto familiar concepts, making them essential for perception, reasoning, and communication. We argue that analogy-building served a critical role in the evolution of cumulative culture, by allowing humans to learn and transmit complex behavioural sequences that would otherwise be too cognitively demanding or opaque to acquire. The emergence of a protolanguage consisting of simple labels would have provided early humans with the cognitive tools to build explicit analogies and to communicate them to others. This focus on analogy-building can shed new light on the coevolution of cognition and culture, and addresses recent calls for better integration of the field of cultural evolution with cognitive science. This talk will address what cumulative cultural evolution is, how we define analogy-building, how analogy-building applies to cumulative cultural evolution, how analogy-building fits into language evolution, and the implications of analogy-building for causal understanding and cognitive evolution.

It is generally acknowledged that analogy is a core mechanism of human cognition, but paradoxically, analogies based on structural similarities would rarely be implemented spontaneously (e.g. without an explicit invitation to compare two representations). The scarcity of deep spontaneous analogies is at odds with the demonstration that familiar concepts from our daily-life are spontaneously used to encode the structure of our experiences. Based on this idea, we will present experimental works highlighting the predominant role of structural similarities in analogical retrieval. The educational stakes lurking behind the tendency to encode the problem’s structures through familiar concepts will also be addressed.

Analogy-making is considered to be one of the cognitive processes which are hard to be accounted for in connectionist terms. A number of models have been proposed, but they are either tailed for specific analogical tasks or require complicated mechanisms which don’t fit into the mainstream connectionist modelling paradigm. In this talk I will present a new connectionist account of analogy-making based on the vector approach to representing symbols (VARS). This approach allows representing relational structures of varying complexity by numeric vectors with fixed dimensionality. I will also present a simple and computationally efficient mechanism of aligning VARS representations, which integrates both semantic similarity and structural constraints. The results of a series of simulations will demonstrate that VARS can account for basic analogical phenomena.

Learning by analogy is a powerful tool children’s developmental repertoire, as well as in educational contexts such as mathematics, where the key knowledge base involves building flexible schemas. However, noticing and learning from analogies develops over time and is cognitively resource intensive. I review studies that provide insight into the relationship between mechanisms driving children’s developing analogy skills, highlighting environmental inputs (parent talk and prior experiences priming attention to relations) and neuro-cognitive factors (Executive Functions and brain injury). I then note implications for mathematics learning, reviewing experimental findings that show analogy can improve learning, but also that both individual differences in EFs and environmental factors that reduce available EFs such as performance pressure can predict student learning.

In 1955, John McCarthy and colleagues proposed an AI summer research project with the following aim: “An attempt will be made to find how to make machines use language, form abstractions and concepts, solve kinds of problems now reserved for humans, and improve themselves.” More than six decades later, all of these research topics remain open and actively investigated in the AI community. While AI has made dramatic progress over the last decade in areas such as vision, natural language processing, and robotics, current AI systems still almost entirely lack the ability to form humanlike concepts and abstractions. Some cognitive scientists have proposed that analogy-making is a central mechanism for conceptual abstraction and understanding in humans. Douglas Hofstadter called analogy-making “the core of cognition”, and Hofstadter and co-author Emmanuel Sander noted, “Without concepts there can be no thought, and without analogies there can be no concepts.” In this talk I will reflect on the role played by analogy-making at all levels of intelligence, and on prospects for developing AI systems with humanlike abilities for abstraction and analogy.

Abstract semantic relations (e.g., category membership, part-whole, antonymy, cause-effect) are central to human intelligence, underlying the distinctively human ability to reason by analogy. I will describe a computational project (Bayesian Analogy with Relational Transformations) that aims to extract explicit representations of abstract semantic relations from non-relational inputs automatically generated by machine learning. BART’s representations predict patterns of typicality and similarity for semantic relations, as well as similarity of neural signals triggered by semantic relations during analogical reasoning. In this approach, analogy emerges from the ability to learn and compare relations; mapping emerges later from the ability to compare patterns of relations.

From a developmental standpoint, it has been argued that two major complementary factors contribute to the development of analogy comprehension: world knowledge and executive functions. Here I will provide evidence in support of the second view. Beyond paradigms that manipulate task difficulty (e.g., number and types of distractors and semantic distance between domains) we will provide eye-tracking data that describes differences in the way children and adults compare the base and target domains in analogy problems. We will follow the same approach with ageing people. This latter population provides a unique opportunity to disentangle the contribution of knowledge and executive processes in analogy making since knowledge is (more than) preserved and executive control is decreasing. Using this paradigm, I will show the extent to which world knowledge (assessed through vocabulary) compensates for decreasing executive control in older populations. Our eye-tracking data suggests that, to a certain extent, differences between younger and older adults are analogous to the differences between younger adults and children in the way they compare the base and the target domains in analogy problems.