To think inside the box, or to think out of the box? Scientific discovery via the reciprocation of insights and concepts

If scientific discovery is one of the main driving forces of human progress, insight is the fuel for the engine, which has long attracted behavior-level research to understand and model its underlying cognitive process. However, current tasks that abstract scientific discovery mostly focus on the emergence of insight, ignoring the special role played by domain knowledge. In this concept paper, we view scientific discovery as an interplay between $thinking \ out \ of \ the \ box$ that actively seeks insightful solutions and $thinking \ inside \ the \ box$ that generalizes on conceptual domain knowledge to keep correct. Accordingly, we propose Mindle, a semantic searching game that triggers scientific-discovery-like thinking spontaneously, as infrastructure for exploring scientific discovery on a large scale. On this basis, the meta-strategies for insights and the usage of concepts can be investigated reciprocally. In the pilot studies, several interesting observations inspire elaborated hypotheses on meta-strategies, context, and individual diversity for further investigations.

On the Complexity of Bayesian Generalization

We consider concept generalization at a large scale in the diverse and natural visual spectrum. Established computational modes (i.e., rule-based or similarity-based) are primarily studied isolated and focus on confined and abstract problem spaces. In this work, we study these two modes when the problem space scales up, and the $complexity$ of concepts becomes diverse. Specifically, at the $representational \ level$, we seek to answer how the complexity varies when a visual concept is mapped to the representation space. Prior psychology literature has shown that two types of complexities (i.e., subjective complexity and visual complexity) (Griffiths and Tenenbaum, 2003) build an inverted-U relation (Donderi, 2006; Sun and Firestone, 2021). Leveraging Representativeness of Attribute (RoA), we computationally confirm the following observation: Models use attributes with high RoA to describe visual concepts, and the description length falls in an inverted-U relation with the increment in visual complexity. At the $computational \ level$, we aim to answer how the complexity of representation affects the shift between the rule- and similarity-based generalization. We hypothesize that category-conditioned visual modeling estimates the co-occurrence frequency between visual and categorical attributes, thus potentially serving as the prior for the natural visual world. Experimental results show that representations with relatively high subjective complexity outperform those with relatively low subjective complexity in the rule-based generalization, while the trend is the opposite in the similarity-based generalization.