2017 Joint IEEE International Conference on Development and Learning and Epigenetic Robotics (ICDL-EpiRob) 2017
DOI: 10.1109/devlrn.2017.8329811
View full text |Buy / Rent full text
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: This paper investigates the role of tutor feedback in language learning using computational models. We compare two dominant paradigms in language learning: interactive learning and cross-situational learning -which differ primarily in the role of social feedback such as gaze or pointing. We analyze the relationship between these two paradigms and propose a new mixed paradigm that combines the two paradigms and allows to test algorithms in experiments that combine no feedback and social feedback. To deal with m… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(30 reference statements)
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Combining unsupervised and supervised grounding approaches has so far not received much attention despite the potential to combine their strengths and eliminate or at least reduce the impact of their shortcomings. Nevens and Spranger (2017) investigated the combination of cross-situational and interactive learning and came to the conclusion that the more feedback is provided, the faster new mappings are obtained and the higher the accuracy of the obtained mappings. While these findings, i.e., that feedback improves the accuracy and sampleefficiency, seem reasonable and intuitive, the employed crosssituational learning algorithm was very limited, thus, it is not clear whether feedback would have provided the same benefit, if a more sophisticated unsupervised grounding mechanism would have been employed.…”
Section: Hybrid Groundingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Combining unsupervised and supervised grounding approaches has so far not received much attention despite the potential to combine their strengths and eliminate or at least reduce the impact of their shortcomings. Nevens and Spranger (2017) investigated the combination of cross-situational and interactive learning and came to the conclusion that the more feedback is provided, the faster new mappings are obtained and the higher the accuracy of the obtained mappings. While these findings, i.e., that feedback improves the accuracy and sampleefficiency, seem reasonable and intuitive, the employed crosssituational learning algorithm was very limited, thus, it is not clear whether feedback would have provided the same benefit, if a more sophisticated unsupervised grounding mechanism would have been employed.…”
Section: Hybrid Groundingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since in both studies one of the employed mechanisms, i.e. the unsupervised mechanism in (Nevens and Spranger, 2017) and the supervised mechanism in (Roesler, 2020a), were quiet limited, this study combines two mechanisms that have previously been shown to achieve state-of-the-art grounding results and evaluates whether their combination leads to better sample-efficiency and accuracy, while ensuring that supervision can be provided in a simple and natural way, and is not required to learn the correct groundings.…”
Section: Hybrid Groundingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…They claimed that the agents can agree on a shared lexicon by a series of language games by acquiring rule-based inferences based on the results of the games. The models for tutor feedback mechanisms further discussed by Nevens and Spranger (2017). They analyzed two different feedback mechanisms, namely, gaze or pointing, and proposed a mixed paradigm that combines these two methods.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%