Actively Learning to Learn Causal Relationships

Almaatouq, A., Griffiths, T. L., & Suchow, J. W., et al. (2022). Beyond playing 20 questions with nature: Integrative experiment design in the social and behavioral sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences (pp. 1–55). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X22002874 Anderson, J. R. (1990). The adaptive character of thought. Hillsdale, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Ashby, F. G., Maddox, W. T., & Lee, W. W. (1994). On the dangers of averaging across subjects when using multidimensional scaling or the similarity-choice model. Psychological Science, 5(3), 144–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00651.x Austerweil, J. L., Sanborn, S., & Griffiths, T. L. (2019). Learning how to generalize. Cognitive Science, 43(8), e12777. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12777 Bonawitz, E., Denison, S., Griffiths, T. L., et al. (2014). Probabilistic models, learning algorithms, and response variability: Sampling in cognitive development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(10), 497–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.06.006 Bramley, N. R., Lagnado, D. A., & Speekenbrink, M. (2015). Conservative forgetful scholars: How people learn causal structure through sequences of interventions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(3), 708–731. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000061 Bramley, N. R., Dayan, P., Griffiths, T. L., et al. (2017). Formalizing neurath’s ship: Approximate algorithms for online causal learning. Psychological Review, 124(3), 301–338. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000061 Buchsbaum, D., Bridgers, S., Skolnick Weisberg, D., et al. (2012). The power of possibility: Causal learning, counterfactual reasoning, and pretend play. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1599), 2202–2212. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0122 Cheng, P. W. (1997). From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. Psychological Review, 104(2), 367–405. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.104.2.367 Chu, J., & Schulz, L. E. (2023). Not playing by the rules: Exploratory play, rational action, and efficient search. Open Mind Coenen, A., Rehder, B., & Gureckis, T. M. (2015). Strategies to intervene on causal systems are adaptively selected. Cognitive Psychology, 79, 102–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.02.004 Coenen, A., Ruggeri, A., Bramley, N. R., et al. (2019). Testing one or multiple: How beliefs about sparsity affect causal experimentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(11), 1923–1941. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000680 Cook, C., Goodman, N. D., & Schulz, L. E. (2011). Where science starts: Spontaneous experiments in preschoolers’ exploratory play. Cognition, 120(3), 341–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.03.003 Dayan, P., & Niv, Y. (2008). Reinforcement learning: The good, the bad and the ugly. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 18(2), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2008.08.003 Denison, S., Bonawitz, E., Gopnik, A., et al. (2013). Rational variability in children’s causal inferences: The sampling hypothesis. Cognition, 126(2), 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.10.010 Eckstein, M. K., & Collins, A. G. E. (2020). Computational evidence for hierarchically structured reinforcement learning in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(47), 29381–29389. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1912330117 Estes, W. K. (1956). The problem of inference from curves based on group data. Psychological Bulletin, 53(2), 134–140. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045156 Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., et al. (2013). Bayesian data analysis. CRC Press. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12(3), 306–355. Goodman, N. (1955). Fact, fiction and forecast. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Goodman, N. D., Tenenbaum, J. B., Feldman, J., et al. (2008). A Rational Analysis of Rule-Based Concept Learning. Cognitive Science, 32(1), 108–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/03640210701802071 Goodman, N. D., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Gerstenberg, T. (2015). Concepts in a probabilistic language of thought. In The conceptual mind: new directions in the study of concepts. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 623–655 Gopnik, A., & Sobel, D. M. (2000). Detecting blickets: How young children use information about novel causal powers in categorization and induction. Child Development, 71(5), 1205–1222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00224 Griffiths, T. L., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2005). Structure and strength in causal induction. Cognitive Psychology, 51(4), 334–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.05.004 Griffiths, T. L., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2009). Theory-based causal induction. Psychological Review, 116(4), 661–716. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017201 Griffiths, T. L., Sobel, D. M., Tenenbaum, J. B., et al. (2011). Bayes and blickets: Effects of knowledge on causal induction in children and adults. Cognitive Science, 35(8), 1407–1455. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01203.x Griffiths, T. L., Lieder, F., & Goodman, N. D. (2015). Rational use of cognitive resources: Levels of analysis between the computational and the algorithmic. Topics in Cognitive Science, 7(2), 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12142 Gureckis, T. M., & Markant, D. B. (2012). Self-directed learning: A cognitive and computational perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5), 464–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612454304 Hayes, K. J. (1953). The backward curve: A method for the study of learning. Psychological Review, 60(4), 269–275. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0056308 Heathcote, A., Brown, S., & Mewhort, D. J. K. (2000). The power law repealed: The case for an exponential law of practice. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7(2), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212979 Hospedales, T., Antoniou, A., Micaelli, P., et al. (2022). Meta-learning in neural networks: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 44(9), 5149–5169. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2021.3079209 Ivanova, D. R., Foster, A., & Kleinegesse, S., et al. (2021). Implicit deep adaptive design: Policy-based experimental design without likelihoods. In Advances in neural information processing systems, vol 34 pp. 25,785–25,798) Curran Associates, Inc. Johnston, L., Hillman, N., & Danks, D. (2021). Individual differences in causal learning. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 43(43) Kalish, M. L. (2013). Learning and extrapolating a periodic function. Memory & Cognition, 41(6), 886–896. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0306-9 Kalish, M. L., Lewandowsky, S., & Kruschke, J. K. (2004). Population of linear experts: Knowledge partitioning and function learning. Psychological Review, 111(4), 1072–1099. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.111.4.1072 Kemp, C., Perfors, A., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2007). Learning overhypotheses with hierarchical Bayesian models. Developmental Science, 10(3), 307–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00585.x Klayman, J., & Ha, Y. W. (1987). Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review, 94(2), 211–228. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.94.2.211 Kosoy, E., Liu, A., & Collins, J., et al. (2022). Learning causal overhypotheses through exploration in children and computational models. https://arxiv.org/abs/arxiv:2202.10430 Lake, B. M., Salakhutdinov, R., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2015). Human-level concept learning through probabilistic program induction. Science, 350(6266), 1332–1338. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab3050 Lee, M. D. (2006). A hierarchical bayesian model of human decision-making on an optimal stopping problem. Cognitive Science, 30(3), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_69 Lieder, F., & Griffiths, T. L. (2017). Strategy selection as rational metareasoning. Psychological Review, 124(6), 762–794. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000075 Lu, H., Yuille, A. L., Liljeholm, M., et al. (2008). Bayesian generic priors for causal learning. Psychological Review, 115(4), 955–984. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013256 Lu, H., Rojas, R. R., Beckers, T., et al. (2016). A bayesian theory of sequential causal learning and abstract transfer. Cognitive Science, 40(2), 404–439. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12236 Lucas, C. G., & Griffiths, T. L. (2010). Learning the form of causal relationships using hierarchical bayesian models. Cognitive Science, 34(1), 113–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01058.x Lucas, C. G., Bridgers, S., Griffiths, T. L., et al. (2014). When children are better (or at least more open-minded) learners than adults: Developmental differences in learning the forms of causal relationships. Cognition, 131(2), 284–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.010 Mansinghka, V. K., Kemp, C., & Tenenbaum, J. B., et al. (2006). Structured priors for structure learning. In Twenty-second conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence, pp. 8 Mayrhofer, R., & Waldmann, M. R. (2016). Sufficiency and necessity assumptions in causal structure induction. Cognitive Science, 40(8), 2137–2150. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12318 McFadden, D. (1973). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics. New York: Academic Press. Nelson, J., & Movellan, J. (2000). Active inference in concept learning. In Advances in neural information processing systems, vol 13. MIT Press Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175 Oaksford, M., & Chater, N. (1994). A rational analysis of the selection task as optimal data selection. Psychological Review, 101(4), 608–631. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.608 Pearl, J. (2009). Causality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803161 Piantadosi, S. T., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Goodman, N. D. (2016). The logical primitives of thought: Empirical foundations for compositional cognitive models. Psychological Review, 123(4), 392–424. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039980 Sanborn, A., Zhu, J. Q., & Spicer, J., et al. (2021) Sampling as the human approximation to probabilistic inference. In S. Muggleton & N. Chater (Eds.), Human-like machine intelligence, (pp. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198862536.003.0021 Schulz, L. E., & Gopnik, A. (2004). Causal learning across domains. Developmental Psychology, 40(2), 162–176. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.40.2.162 Schulz, L. E., & Sommerville, J. (2006). God does not play dice: Causal determinism and preschoolers’ causal inferences. Child Development, 77(2), 427–442. https://arxiv.org/abs/3696479 Shafto, P., & Goodman, N. (2008). Teaching games: Statistical sampling assumptions for learning in pedagogical situations. In: Proceedings of the 30th annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 1632–1637). Cognitive Science Society Austin, TX Sim, Z. L., & Xu, F. (2017). Learning higher-order generalizations through free play: Evidence from 2- and 3-year-old children. Developmental Psychology, 53(4), 642–651. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000278 Steyvers, M., Tenenbaum, J. B., Wagenmakers, E. J., et al. (2003). Inferring causal networks from observations and interventions. Cognitive Science, 27(3), 453–489. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2703_6 Steyvers, M., Lee, M. D., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2009). A Bayesian analysis of human decision-making on bandit problems. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53(3), 168–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2008.11.002 Tenenbaum, J. B., & Griffiths, T. L. (2001). Structure learning in human causal induction. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp. 7) Tomov, M. S., Schulz, E., & Gershman, S. J. (2021). Multi-task reinforcement learning in humans. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(6), 764–773. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-01035-y Valentin, S., Kleinegesse, S., & Bramley, N. R., et al. (2023). Designing optimal behavioral experiments using machine learning. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.07721 Vinyals, O., Babuschkin, I., Czarnecki, W. M., et al. (2019). Grandmaster level in StarCraft II using multi-agent reinforcement learning. Nature, 575(7782), 350–354. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1724-z Wang, J. X., King, M., & Porcel, N. P. M., et al. (2021). Alchemy: A benchmark and analysis toolkit for meta-reinforcement learning agents. In: Thirty-Fifth Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems Datasets and Benchmarks Track Wason, P. C. (1960). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 129–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470216008416717 Wurman, P. R., Barrett, S., Kawamoto, K., et al. (2022). Outracing champion Gran Turismo drivers with deep reinforcement learning. Nature, 602(7896), 223–228. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04357-7 Yuille, A. L., & Lu, H. (2007). The noisy-logical distribution and its application to causal inference. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 20, 1673–1680. Zhang, A., McAllister, R., & Calandra, R., et al. (2021). Learning invariant representations for reinforcement learning without reconstruction. arXiv:2006.10742 [cs, stat] https://arxiv.org/abs/arxiv:2006.10742 [cs, stat] Zhao, B., Lucas, C. G., & Bramley, N. R. (2022). How do people generalize causal relations over objects? A non-parametric bayesian account. Computational Brain & Behavior, 5(1), 22–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42113-021-00124-z Zhu, J. Q., Sanborn, A. N., & Chater, N. (2020). The Bayesian sampler: Generic Bayesian inference causes incoherence in human probability judgments. Psychological Review, 127(5), 719.