Context Sensitivity Improves Human-Machine Visual Alignment

Modern machine learning models typically represent inputs as fixed points in a high-dimensional embedding space. While this approach has been proven powerful for a wide range of downstream tasks, it fundamentally differs from the way humans process information. Because humans are constantly adapting to their environment, they represent objects and their relationships in a highly context-sensitive manner. To address this gap, we propose a method for context-sensitive similarity computation from neural network embeddings, applied to modeling a triplet odd-one-out task with an anchor image serving as simultaneous context. Modeling context enables us to achieve up to a 15% improvement in odd-one-out accuracy over a context-insensitive model. We find that this improvement is consistent across both original and "human-aligned" vision foundation models.

Distinct Computations Emerge From Compositional Curricula in In-Context Learning

In-context learning (ICL) research often considers learning a function in-context through a uniform sample of input-output pairs. Here, we investigate how presenting a compositional subtask curriculum in context may alter the computations a transformer learns. We design a compositional algorithmic task based on the modular exponential-a double exponential task composed of two single exponential subtasks and train transformer models to learn the task in-context. We compare (a) models trained using an in-context curriculum consisting of single exponential subtasks and, (b) models trained directly on the double exponential task without such a curriculum. We show that models trained with a subtask curriculum can perform zero-shot inference on unseen compositional tasks and are more robust given the same context length. We study how the task and subtasks are represented across the two training regimes. We find that the models employ diverse strategies modulated by the specific curriculum design.

The emergence of sparse attention: impact of data distribution and benefits of repetition

Emergence is a fascinating property of large language models and neural networks more broadly: as models scale and train for longer, they sometimes develop new abilities in sudden ways. Despite initial studies, we still lack a comprehensive understanding of how and when these abilities emerge. To address this gap, we study the emergence over training of sparse attention, a critical and frequently observed attention pattern in Transformers. By combining theoretical analysis of a toy model with empirical observations on small Transformers trained on a linear regression variant, we uncover the mechanics driving sparse attention emergence and reveal that emergence timing follows power laws based on task structure, architecture, and optimizer choice. We additionally find that repetition can greatly speed up emergence. Finally, we confirm these results on a well-studied in-context associative recall task. Our findings provide a simple, theoretically grounded framework for understanding how data distributions and model design influence the learning dynamics behind one form of emergence.

On the generalization of language models from in-context learning and finetuning: a controlled study

Large language models exhibit exciting capabilities, yet can show surprisingly narrow generalization from finetuning -- from failing to generalize to simple reversals of relations they are trained on, to missing logical deductions that can be made from trained information. These failures to generalize from fine-tuning can hinder practical application of these models. However, language models' in-context learning shows different inductive biases, and can generalize better in some of these cases. Here, we explore these differences in generalization between in-context- and fine-tuning-based learning. To do so, we constructed several novel datasets to evaluate and improve models' ability to generalize from finetuning data. The datasets are constructed to isolate the knowledge in the dataset from that in pretraining, to create clean tests of generalization. We expose pretrained large models to controlled subsets of the information in these datasets -- either in context, or through fine-tuning -- and evaluate their performance on test sets that require various types of generalization. We find overall that in data-matched settings, in-context learning can generalize more flexibly than fine-tuning (though we also find some qualifications of prior findings, such as cases when fine-tuning can generalize to reversals embedded in a larger structure of knowledge). We build on these findings to propose a method to enable improved generalization from fine-tuning: adding in-context inferences to finetuning data. We show that this method improves generalization across various splits of our datasets and other benchmarks. Our results have implications for understanding the inductive biases of different modes of learning in language models, and practically improving their performance.

Decoupling the components of geometric understanding in Vision Language Models

Understanding geometry relies heavily on vision. In this work, we evaluate whether state-of-the-art vision language models (VLMs) can understand simple geometric concepts. We use a paradigm from cognitive science that isolates visual understanding of simple geometry from the many other capabilities it is often conflated with such as reasoning and world knowledge. We compare model performance with human adults from the USA, as well as with prior research on human adults without formal education from an Amazonian indigenous group. We find that VLMs consistently underperform both groups of human adults, although they succeed with some concepts more than others. We also find that VLM geometric understanding is more brittle than human understanding, and is not robust when tasks require mental rotation. This work highlights interesting differences in the origin of geometric understanding in humans and machines -- e.g. from printed materials used in formal education vs. interactions with the physical world or a combination of the two -- and a small step toward understanding these differences.

The in-context inductive biases of vision-language models differ across modalities

Inductive biases are what allow learners to make guesses in the absence of conclusive evidence. These biases have often been studied in cognitive science using concepts or categories -- e.g. by testing how humans generalize a new category from a few examples that leave the category boundary ambiguous. We use these approaches to study generalization in foundation models during in-context learning. Modern foundation models can condition on both vision and text, and differences in how they interpret and learn from these different modalities is an emerging area of study. Here, we study how their generalizations vary by the modality in which stimuli are presented, and the way the stimuli are described in text. We study these biases with three different experimental paradigms, across three different vision-language models. We find that the models generally show some bias towards generalizing according to shape over color. This shape bias tends to be amplified when the examples are presented visually. By contrast, when examples are presented in text, the ordering of adjectives affects generalization. However, the extent of these effects vary across models and paradigms. These results help to reveal how vision-language models represent different types of inputs in context, and may have practical implications for the use of vision-language models.

Aligning Machine and Human Visual Representations across Abstraction Levels

Deep neural networks have achieved success across a wide range of applications, including as models of human behavior in vision tasks. However, neural network training and human learning differ in fundamental ways, and neural networks often fail to generalize as robustly as humans do, raising questions regarding the similarity of their underlying representations. What is missing for modern learning systems to exhibit more human-like behavior? We highlight a key misalignment between vision models and humans: whereas human conceptual knowledge is hierarchically organized from fine- to coarse-scale distinctions, model representations do not accurately capture all these levels of abstraction. To address this misalignment, we first train a teacher model to imitate human judgments, then transfer human-like structure from its representations into pretrained state-of-the-art vision foundation models. These human-aligned models more accurately approximate human behavior and uncertainty across a wide range of similarity tasks, including a new dataset of human judgments spanning multiple levels of semantic abstractions. They also perform better on a diverse set of machine learning tasks, increasing generalization and out-of-distribution robustness. Thus, infusing neural networks with additional human knowledge yields a best-of-both-worlds representation that is both more consistent with human cognition and more practically useful, thus paving the way toward more robust, interpretable, and human-like artificial intelligence systems.

SODA: Bottleneck Diffusion Models for Representation Learning

We introduce SODA, a self-supervised diffusion model, designed for representation learning. The model incorporates an image encoder, which distills a source view into a compact representation, that, in turn, guides the generation of related novel views. We show that by imposing a tight bottleneck between the encoder and a denoising decoder, and leveraging novel view synthesis as a self-supervised objective, we can turn diffusion models into strong representation learners, capable of capturing visual semantics in an unsupervised manner. To the best of our knowledge, SODA is the first diffusion model to succeed at ImageNet linear-probe classification, and, at the same time, it accomplishes reconstruction, editing and synthesis tasks across a wide range of datasets. Further investigation reveals the disentangled nature of its emergent latent space, that serves as an effective interface to control and manipulate the model's produced images. All in all, we aim to shed light on the exciting and promising potential of diffusion models, not only for image generation, but also for learning rich and robust representations.

Getting aligned on representational alignment

Biological and artificial information processing systems form representations that they can use to categorize, reason, plan, navigate, and make decisions. How can we measure the extent to which the representations formed by these diverse systems agree? Do similarities in representations then translate into similar behavior? How can a system's representations be modified to better match those of another system? These questions pertaining to the study of representational alignment are at the heart of some of the most active research areas in cognitive science, neuroscience, and machine learning. For example, cognitive scientists measure the representational alignment of multiple individuals to identify shared cognitive priors, neuroscientists align fMRI responses from multiple individuals into a shared representational space for group-level analyses, and ML researchers distill knowledge from teacher models into student models by increasing their alignment. Unfortunately, there is limited knowledge transfer between research communities interested in representational alignment, so progress in one field often ends up being rediscovered independently in another. Thus, greater cross-field communication would be advantageous. To improve communication between these fields, we propose a unifying framework that can serve as a common language between researchers studying representational alignment. We survey the literature from all three fields and demonstrate how prior work fits into this framework. Finally, we lay out open problems in representational alignment where progress can benefit all three of these fields. We hope that our work can catalyze cross-disciplinary collaboration and accelerate progress for all communities studying and developing information processing systems. We note that this is a working paper and encourage readers to reach out with their suggestions for future revisions.

Evaluating Spatial Understanding of Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) show remarkable capabilities across a variety of tasks. Despite the models only seeing text in training, several recent studies suggest that LLM representations implicitly capture aspects of the underlying grounded concepts. Here, we explore LLM representations of a particularly salient kind of grounded knowledge -- spatial relationships. We design natural-language navigation tasks and evaluate the ability of LLMs, in particular GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4, and Llama2 series models, to represent and reason about spatial structures, and compare these abilities to human performance on the same tasks. These tasks reveal substantial variability in LLM performance across different spatial structures, including square, hexagonal, and triangular grids, rings, and trees. We also discover that, similar to humans, LLMs utilize object names as landmarks for maintaining spatial maps. Finally, in extensive error analysis, we find that LLMs' mistakes reflect both spatial and non-spatial factors. These findings suggest that LLMs appear to capture certain aspects of spatial structure implicitly, but room for improvement remains.