Reinforcement Learning is a mature technology, often suggested as a potential route towards Artificial General Intelligence, with the ambitious goal of replicating the wide range of abilities found in natural and artificial intelligence, including the complexities of human cognition. While RL had shown successes in relatively constrained environments, such as the classic Atari games and specific continuous control problems, recent years have seen efforts to expand its applicability. This work investigates the potential of RL in demonstrating intelligent behaviour and its progress in addressing more complex and less structured problem domains. We present an investigation into the capacity of modern RL frameworks in addressing a seemingly straightforward 3D Same-Different visuospatial task. While initial applications of state-of-the-art methods, including PPO, behavioural cloning and imitation learning, revealed challenges in directly learning optimal strategies, the successful implementation of curriculum learning offers a promising avenue. Effective learning was achieved by strategically designing the lesson plan based on the findings of a real-world human experiment.

While convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have come to match and exceed human performance in many settings, the tasks these models optimize for are largely constrained to the level of individual objects, such as classification and captioning. Humans remain vastly superior to CNNs in visual tasks involving relations, including the ability to identify two objects as `same' or `different'. A number of studies have shown that while CNNs can be coaxed into learning the same-different relation in some settings, they tend to generalize poorly to other instances of this relation. In this work we show that the same CNN architectures that fail to generalize the same-different relation with conventional training are able to succeed when trained via meta-learning, which explicitly encourages abstraction and generalization across tasks.

Equality reasoning is ubiquitous and purely abstract: sameness or difference may be evaluated no matter the nature of the underlying objects. As a result, same-different tasks (SD) have been extensively studied as a starting point for understanding abstract reasoning in humans and across animal species. With the rise of neural networks (NN) that exhibit striking apparent proficiency for abstractions, equality reasoning in NNs has also gained interest. Yet despite extensive study, conclusions about equality reasoning vary widely and with little consensus. To clarify the underlying principles in learning SD, we develop a theory of equality reasoning in multi-layer perceptrons (MLP). Following observations in comparative psychology, we propose a spectrum of behavior that ranges from conceptual to perceptual outcomes. Conceptual behavior is characterized by task-specific representations, efficient learning, and insensitivity to spurious perceptual details. Perceptual behavior is characterized by strong sensitivity to spurious perceptual details, accompanied by the need for exhaustive training to learn the task. We develop a mathematical theory to show that an MLP's behavior is driven by learning richness. Rich-regime MLPs exhibit conceptual behavior, whereas lazy-regime MLPs exhibit perceptual behavior. We validate our theoretical findings in vision SD experiments, showing that rich feature learning promotes success by encouraging hallmarks of conceptual behavior. Overall, our work identifies feature learning richness as a key parameter modulating equality reasoning, and suggests that equality reasoning in humans and animals may similarly depend on learning richness in neural circuits.

Although deep neural networks can achieve human-level performance on many object recognition benchmarks, prior work suggests that these same models fail to learn simple abstract relations, such as determining whether two objects are the same or different. Much of this prior work focuses on training convolutional neural networks to classify images of two same or two different abstract shapes, testing generalization on within-distribution stimuli. In this article, we comprehensively study whether deep neural networks can acquire and generalize same-different relations both within and out-of-distribution using a variety of architectures, forms of pretraining, and fine-tuning datasets. We find that certain pretrained transformers can learn a same-different relation that generalizes with near perfect accuracy to out-of-distribution stimuli. Furthermore, we find that fine-tuning on abstract shapes that lack texture or color provides the strongest out-of-distribution generalization. Our results suggest that, with the right approach, deep neural networks can learn generalizable same-different visual relations.

Visual reasoning is a long-term goal of vision research. In the last decade, several works have attempted to apply deep neural networks (DNNs) to the task of learning visual relations from images, with modest results in terms of the generalization of the relations learned. In recent years, several innovations in DNNs have been developed in order to enable learning abstract relation from images. In this work, we systematically evaluate a series of DNNs that integrate mechanism such as slot attention, recurrently guided attention, and external memory, in the simplest possible visual reasoning task: deciding whether two objects are the same or different. We found that, although some models performed better than others in generalizing the same-different relation to specific types of images, no model was able to generalize this relation across the board. We conclude that abstract visual reasoning remains largely an unresolved challenge for DNNs.

The STAR architecture was designed to test the value of the full Selective Tuning model of visual attention for complex real-world visuospatial tasks and behaviors. However, knowledge of how humans solve such tasks in 3D as active observers is lean. We thus devised a novel experimental setup and examined such behavior. We discovered that humans exhibit a variety of problem-solving strategies whose breadth and complexity are surprising and not easily handled by current methodologies. It is apparent that solution methods are dynamically composed by hypothesizing sequences of actions, testing them, and if they fail, trying different ones. The importance of active observation is striking as is the lack of any learning effect. These results inform our Cognitive Program representation of STAR extending its relevance to real-world tasks.

The first episode of Sesame Street in 1969 included a segment called "One of These Things Is Not Like the Other." Viewers were asked to consider a poster that displayed three 2s and one W, and to decide--while singing along to the game's eponymous jingle--which symbol didn't belong. Dozens of episodes of Sesame Street repeated the game, comparing everything from abstract patterns to plates of vegetables. Kids never had to relearn the rules. Understanding the distinction between "same" and "different" was enough.

The first episode of Sesame Street in 1969 included a segment called "One of These Things Is Not Like the Other." Viewers were asked to consider a poster that displayed three 2s and one W, and to decide -- while singing along to the game's eponymous jingle -- which symbol didn't belong. Dozens of episodes of Sesame Street repeated the game, comparing everything from abstract patterns to plates of vegetables. Kids never had to relearn the rules. Understanding the distinction between "same" and "different" was enough.

With the rise of machines to human-level performance in complex recognition tasks, a growing amount of work is directed towards comparing information processing in humans and machines. These studies are an exciting chance to learn about one system by studying the other. Here, we propose ideas on how to design, conduct and interpret experiments such that they adequately support the investigation of mechanisms when comparing human and machine perception. We demonstrate and apply these ideas through three case studies. The first case study shows how human bias can affect how we interpret results, and that several analytic tools can help to overcome this human reference point. In the second case study, we highlight the difference between necessary and sufficient mechanisms in visual reasoning tasks. Thereby, we show that contrary to previous suggestions, feedback mechanisms might not be necessary for the tasks in question. The third case study highlights the importance of aligning experimental conditions. We find that a previously-observed difference in object recognition does not hold when adapting the experiment to make conditions more equitable between humans and machines. In presenting a checklist for comparative studies of visual reasoning in humans and machines, we hope to highlight how to overcome potential pitfalls in design or inference.

Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) have become very successful in the domain of artificial intelligence. They have begun to directly influence our lives through image recognition, automated machine translation, precision medicine and many other solutions. Furthermore, there are many parallels between these modern artificial algorithms and biological brains: The two systems resemble each other in their function - for example, they can solve surprisingly complex tasks - and in their anatomical structure - for example, they contain many hierarchically structured neurons. Given these apparent similarities, many questions arise: How similar are human and machine vision really? Can we understand human vision by studying machine vision?