A Computational Model for the Acquisition and Use of Phonological Knowledge

Does knowledge of language consist of symbolic rules? How do children learn and use their linguistic knowledge? To elucidate these questions, we present a computational model that acquires phonological knowledge from a corpus of common English nouns and verbs. In our model the phonological knowledge is encapsulated as boolean constraints operating on classical linguistic representations of speech sounds in term of distinctive features. The learning algorithm compiles a corpus of words into increasingly sophisticated constraints. The algorithm is incremental, greedy, and fast. It yields one-shot learning of phonological constraints from a few examples. Our system exhibits behavior similar to that of young children learning phonological knowledge. As a bonus the constraints can be interpreted as classical linguistic rules. The computational model can be implemented by a surprisingly simple hardware mechanism. Our mechanism also sheds light on a fundamental AI question: How are signals related to symbols?

Sparse Representations for Fast, One-Shot Learning

Humans rapidly and reliably learn many kinds of regularities and generalizations. We propose a novel model of fast learning that exploits the properties of sparse representations and the constraints imposed by a plausible hardware mechanism. To demonstrate our approach we describe a computational model of acquisition in the domain of morphophonology. We encapsulate phonological information as bidirectional boolean constraint relations operating on the classical linguistic representations of speech sounds in term of distinctive features. The performance model is described as a hardware mechanism that incrementally enforces the constraints. Phonological behavior arises from the action of this mechanism. Constraints are induced from a corpus of common English nouns and verbs. The induction algorithm compiles the corpus into increasingly sophisticated constraints. The algorithm yields one-shot learning from a few examples. Our model has been implemented as a computer program. The program exhibits phonological behavior similar to that of young children. As a bonus the constraints that are acquired can be interpreted as classical linguistic rules.

Computational Consequences of Agreement and Ambiguity in Natural Language

The computer science technique of computational complexity analysis can provide powerful insights into the algorithm-neutral analysis of information processing tasks. Here we show that a simple, theory-neutral linguistic model of syntactic agreement and ambiguity demonstrates that natural language parsing may be computationally intractable. Significantly, we show that it may be syntactic features rather than rules that can cause this difficulty. Informally, human languages and the computationally intractable Satisfiability (SAT) problem share two costly computional mechanisms: both enforce agreement among symbols across unbounded distances (Subject-Verb agreement) and both allow ambiguity (is a word a Noun or a Verb?).

Meta-Rules: Reasoning About Control

How can we insure that knowledge embedded in a program is applied effectively? Traditionally the answer to this question has been sought in different problem solving paradigms and in different approaches to encoding and indexing knowledge. Each of these is useful with a certain variety of problem, but they all share a common problem: they become ineffective in the face of a sufficiently large knowledge base. How then can we make it possible for a system to continue to function in the face of a very large number of plausibly useful chunks of knowledge? In response to this question we propose a framework for viewing issues of knowledge indexing and retrieval, a framework that includes what appears to be a useful perspective on the concept of a strategy. We view strategies as a means of controlling invocation in situations where traditional selection mechanisms become ineffective. We examine ways to effect such control, and describe meta-rules, a means of specifying strategies which offers a number of advantages. We consider at some length how and when it is useful to reason about control, and explore the advantages meta-rules offer for doing this.

Determining the Scope of English Quantifiers

How can one represent the meaning of English sentences in a formal logical notation such that the translation of English into this logical form is simple and general? This report answers this question for a particular kind of meaning, namely quantifier scope, and for a particular part of the translation, namely the syntactic influence on the translation. Rules are presented which predict, for example, that the sentence: Everyone in this room speaks at least two languages. has the quantifier scope AE in standard predicate calculus, while the sentence: At lease two languages are spoken by everyone in this room. has the quantifier scope EA. Three different logical forms are presented, and their translation rules are examined. One of the logical forms is predicate calculus. The translation rules for it were developed by Robert May (May 19 77). The other two logical forms are Skolem form and a simple computer programming language. The translation rules for these two logical forms are new. All three sets of translation rules are shown to be general, in the sense that the same rules express the constraints that syntax imposes on certain other linguistic phenomena. For example, the rules that constrain the translation into Skolem form are shown to constrain definite np anaphora as well. A large body of carefully collected data is presented, and used to assess the empirical accuracy of each of the theories. None of the three theories is vastly superior to the others. However, the report concludes by suggesting that a combination of the two newer theories would have the greatest generality and the highest empirical accuracy.