Grounding Language about Belief in a Bayesian Theory-of-Mind
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper presents a Bayesian computational model for representing and reasoning about beliefs in a theory-of-mind framework.
- The model aims to ground language about belief in a principled mathematical foundation, enabling more nuanced and flexible belief representation compared to previous approaches.
- The model is tested on a range of belief-related tasks, demonstrating its ability to capture different types of beliefs and reasoning about them.
Plain English Explanation
This paper describes a new way of modeling how people understand and talk about beliefs. The researchers created a mathematical model based on Bayesian probability theory to represent different types of beliefs and how they change over time.
The key idea is that instead of just representing beliefs as simple true/false statements, the model can capture more nuanced and flexible belief representations. For example, it can represent degrees of certainty or uncertainty about a belief, as well as how beliefs might change as new information becomes available.
By grounding the way we talk about beliefs in this more rigorous mathematical framework, the researchers hope to develop better AI systems that can reason about beliefs and engage in more natural conversations about them. This could also shed light on how humans form and update their own beliefs and reason about the beliefs of others.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents a Bayesian computational model for representing and reasoning about beliefs in a theory-of-mind framework. The model builds on previous work in belief representation, but aims to provide a more flexible and nuanced approach.
At the core of the model is the representation of the environment and an agent's belief state. The environment is represented as a set of possible states, and the agent's beliefs are modeled as a probability distribution over these states. This allows the model to capture degrees of certainty or uncertainty, rather than just binary true/false beliefs.
The model also includes mechanisms for updating beliefs based on new observations and for reasoning about the beliefs of other agents. This belief dynamics tracking and theory-of-mind modeling are key capabilities that enable the model to ground language about belief in a principled way.
The paper evaluates the model on a range of belief-related tasks, such as false belief tasks and belief attribution. The results demonstrate the model's ability to capture different types of beliefs and reasoning about them, suggesting its potential for applications in areas like natural language processing and cognitive modeling.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents a well-designed computational model that makes a valuable contribution to the field of belief representation and reasoning. The Bayesian framework used in the model provides a solid mathematical foundation for grounding language about belief, and the flexibility of the approach is a key strength.
However, the paper also acknowledges some limitations of the model. For example, the current implementation assumes a finite set of possible environment states, which may not always be realistic. Extending the model to handle infinite or continuous belief histories could be an area for future research.
Additionally, while the model performs well on the specific tasks evaluated in the paper, it remains to be seen how it would scale to more complex, real-world scenarios. Evaluating the model's performance and robustness in a wider range of settings would be an important next step.
Overall, this paper represents a promising step forward in the quest to develop AI systems that can reason about beliefs and engage in more naturalistic conversations about them. The authors have laid a solid foundation, and future work building on this model could have significant implications for fields like natural language processing, cognitive science, and human-AI interaction.
Conclusion
This paper presents a Bayesian computational model for representing and reasoning about beliefs in a theory-of-mind framework. The model provides a principled mathematical foundation for grounding language about belief, enabling more nuanced and flexible belief representation compared to previous approaches.
The model's ability to capture different types of beliefs and reasoning about them, as demonstrated through its performance on a range of tasks, suggests its potential for applications in areas like natural language processing, cognitive modeling, and human-AI interaction. While the model has some limitations, this research represents an important step forward in the development of AI systems that can engage in more natural and effective communication about beliefs and mental states.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Grounding Language about Belief in a Bayesian Theory-of-Mind
Lance Ying, Tan Zhi-Xuan, Lionel Wong, Vikash Mansinghka, Joshua Tenenbaum
Despite the fact that beliefs are mental states that cannot be directly observed, humans talk about each others' beliefs on a regular basis, often using rich compositional language to describe what others think and know. What explains this capacity to interpret the hidden epistemic content of other minds? In this paper, we take a step towards an answer by grounding the semantics of belief statements in a Bayesian theory-of-mind: By modeling how humans jointly infer coherent sets of goals, beliefs, and plans that explain an agent's actions, then evaluating statements about the agent's beliefs against these inferences via epistemic logic, our framework provides a conceptual role semantics for belief, explaining the gradedness and compositionality of human belief attributions, as well as their intimate connection with goals and plans. We evaluate this framework by studying how humans attribute goals and beliefs while watching an agent solve a doors-and-keys gridworld puzzle that requires instrumental reasoning about hidden objects. In contrast to pure logical deduction, non-mentalizing baselines, and mentalizing that ignores the role of instrumental plans, our model provides a much better fit to human goal and belief attributions, demonstrating the importance of theory-of-mind for a semantics of belief.
Read more7/10/2024
0
Understanding Epistemic Language with a Bayesian Theory of Mind
Lance Ying, Tan Zhi-Xuan, Lionel Wong, Vikash Mansinghka, Joshua B. Tenenbaum
How do people understand and evaluate claims about others' beliefs, even though these beliefs cannot be directly observed? In this paper, we introduce a cognitive model of epistemic language interpretation, grounded in Bayesian inferences about other agents' goals, beliefs, and intentions: a language-augmented Bayesian theory-of-mind (LaBToM). By translating natural language into an epistemic ``language-of-thought'', then evaluating these translations against the inferences produced by inverting a probabilistic generative model of rational action and perception, LaBToM captures graded plausibility judgments about epistemic claims. We validate our model in an experiment where participants watch an agent navigate a maze to find keys hidden in boxes needed to reach their goal, then rate sentences about the agent's beliefs. In contrast with multimodal LLMs (GPT-4o, Gemini Pro) and ablated models, our model correlates highly with human judgments for a wide range of expressions, including modal language, uncertainty expressions, knowledge claims, likelihood comparisons, and attributions of false belief.
Read more8/23/2024
0
Language Models Represent Beliefs of Self and Others
Wentao Zhu, Zhining Zhang, Yizhou Wang
Understanding and attributing mental states, known as Theory of Mind (ToM), emerges as a fundamental capability for human social reasoning. While Large Language Models (LLMs) appear to possess certain ToM abilities, the mechanisms underlying these capabilities remain elusive. In this study, we discover that it is possible to linearly decode the belief status from the perspectives of various agents through neural activations of language models, indicating the existence of internal representations of self and others' beliefs. By manipulating these representations, we observe dramatic changes in the models' ToM performance, underscoring their pivotal role in the social reasoning process. Additionally, our findings extend to diverse social reasoning tasks that involve different causal inference patterns, suggesting the potential generalizability of these representations.
Read more5/31/2024
📈
0
Learning mental states estimation through self-observation: a developmental synergy between intentions and beliefs representations in a deep-learning model of Theory of Mind
Francesca Bianco, Silvia Rigato, Maria Laura Filippetti, Dimitri Ognibene
Theory of Mind (ToM), the ability to attribute beliefs, intentions, or mental states to others, is a crucial feature of human social interaction. In complex environments, where the human sensory system reaches its limits, behaviour is strongly driven by our beliefs about the state of the world around us. Accessing others' mental states, e.g., beliefs and intentions, allows for more effective social interactions in natural contexts. Yet, these variables are not directly observable, making understanding ToM a challenging quest of interest for different fields, including psychology, machine learning and robotics. In this paper, we contribute to this topic by showing a developmental synergy between learning to predict low-level mental states (e.g., intentions, goals) and attributing high-level ones (i.e., beliefs). Specifically, we assume that learning beliefs attribution can occur by observing one's own decision processes involving beliefs, e.g., in a partially observable environment. Using a simple feed-forward deep learning model, we show that, when learning to predict others' intentions and actions, more accurate predictions can be acquired earlier if beliefs attribution is learnt simultaneously. Furthermore, we show that the learning performance improves even when observed actors have a different embodiment than the observer and the gain is higher when observing beliefs-driven chunks of behaviour. We propose that our computational approach can inform the understanding of human social cognitive development and be relevant for the design of future adaptive social robots able to autonomously understand, assist, and learn from human interaction partners in novel natural environments and tasks.
Read more7/26/2024