Familiarity and dominance relations among female sooty mangabeys in the Taï National Park

Range, Friederike; Noë, Ronald

doi:10.1002/ajp.1070

Cited by 77 publications

(108 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The model discovers that the order is the most appropriate form, and the best order found (Fig. 4A) is consistent with the dominance hierarchy inferred by primatologists studying this troop (39). Hierarchical structure is also characteristic of human organizations, although tree-structured hierarchies are perhaps more common than full linear orders.…”

supporting

confidence: 76%

The discovery of structural form

Kemp

Tenenbaum

2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

435

441

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Algorithms for finding structure in data have become increasingly important both as tools for scientific data analysis and as models of human learning, yet they suffer from a critical limitation. Scientists discover qualitatively new forms of structure in observed data: For instance, Linnaeus recognized the hierarchical organization of biological species, and Mendeleev recognized the periodic structure of the chemical elements. Analogous insights play a pivotal role in cognitive development: Children discover that object category labels can be organized into hierarchies, friendship networks are organized into cliques, and comparative relations (e.g., ''bigger than'' or ''better than'') respect a transitive order. Standard algorithms, however, can only learn structures of a single form that must be specified in advance: For instance, algorithms for hierarchical clustering create tree structures, whereas algorithms for dimensionality-reduction create low-dimensional spaces. Here, we present a computational model that learns structures of many different forms and that discovers which form is best for a given dataset. The model makes probabilistic inferences over a space of graph grammars representing trees, linear orders, multidimensional spaces, rings, dominance hierarchies, cliques, and other forms and successfully discovers the underlying structure of a variety of physical, biological, and social domains. Our approach brings structure learning methods closer to human abilities and may lead to a deeper computational understanding of cognitive development.cognitive development ͉ structure discovery ͉ unsupervised learning

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 76%

The discovery of structural form

Kemp

Tenenbaum

2008

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

435

441

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An ordering structure of this form was used to account for patterns of dominance behavior among members of a monkey troop (observed by Range & Noë, 2002; see Kemp & Tenenbaum, 2008, Fig. 4a, p. 10689).…”

Section: Relation To Previous Models Of Learning Dimensional Represenmentioning

confidence: 99%

The discovery and comparison of symbolic magnitudes

Chen

Holyoak

2014

Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tHumans and other primates are able to make relative magnitude comparisons, both with perceptual stimuli and with symbolic inputs that convey magnitude information. Although numerous models of magnitude comparison have been proposed, the basic question of how symbolic magnitudes (e.g., size or intelligence of animals) are derived and represented in memory has received little attention. We argue that symbolic magnitudes often will not correspond directly to elementary features of individual concepts. Rather, magnitudes may be formed in working memory based on computations over more basic features stored in long-term memory. We present a model of how magnitudes can be acquired and compared based on BARTlet, a representationally simpler version of Bayesian Analogy with Relational Transformations (BART; Lu, Chen, & Holyoak, 2012). BARTlet operates on distributions of magnitude variables created by applying dimension-specific weights (learned with the aid of empirical priors derived from pre-categorical comparisons) to more primitive features of objects. The resulting magnitude distributions, formed and maintained in working memory, are sensitive to contextual influences such as the range of stimuli and polarity of the question. By incorporating psychological reference points that control the precision of magnitudes in working memory and applying the tools of signal detection theory, BARTlet is able to account for a wide range of empirical phenomena involving magnitude comparisons, including the symbolic distance effect and the semantic congruity effect. We discuss the role of reference points in cognitive and social decision-making, and implications for the evolution of relational representations.

show abstract

“…Intra-group feeding competition is comparatively low. [35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44] Resource contestability is not as great a constraint on group size, so that mangabey groups, sometimes numbering over 100 individuals, are the largest of any Taï primate (Table 1). During periods of extreme resource scarcity, mangabey groups often divide into subgroups.…”

Section: Thementioning

confidence: 99%

“…These relationships follow patterns resembling those observed in other matrilineal primate species. 38,39 Access to food and to preferred feeding sites is rank-related and highranking members tend to be surrounded by multiple group members near the group's center. High-ranking males are preferred by females.…”

Section: Thementioning

confidence: 99%

Socioecology, predation, and cognition in a community of West African monkeys

McGraw

Zuberbühler

2008

Evolutionary Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Ivory Coast's Taï Forest is home to a diverse primate fauna, including eight monkey species that interact daily with the environment, each other, and a web of predators. These interactions have led to an array of adaptations, some of which conform to theoretical expectations, and others are at odds with current behavioral ecology models. In this paper, we draw on fifteen years of observations to examine two central issues. First, how do broad trends in diet and resource distribution influence group size and levels of sociality? Second, what mechanisms are used to counter pressures exerted by the predator community? The general picture that emerges is that while the pressure exerted by predators at Taï has led to a host of behavioral and cognitive adaptations, it is food preferences and foraging habits, not predation pressure, that are the main determinants, not only of group size, but also its direct consequences ‐ mating systems and sociality levels.

show abstract

Familiarity and dominance relations among female sooty mangabeys in the Taï National Park

Cited by 77 publications

References 35 publications

The discovery of structural form

The discovery of structural form

The discovery and comparison of symbolic magnitudes

Socioecology, predation, and cognition in a community of West African monkeys

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About