Learning Alternative Ways of Performing a Task
2404.02579
0
0
Abstract
A common way of learning to perform a task is to observe how it is carried out by experts. However, it is well known that for most tasks there is no unique way to perform them. This is especially noticeable the more complex the task is because factors such as the skill or the know-how of the expert may well affect the way she solves the task. In addition, learning from experts also suffers of having a small set of training examples generally coming from several experts (since experts are usually a limited and expensive resource), being all of them positive examples (i.e. examples that represent successful executions of the task). Traditional machine learning techniques are not useful in such scenarios, as they require extensive training data. Starting from very few executions of the task presented as activity sequences, we introduce a novel inductive approach for learning multiple models, with each one representing an alternative strategy of performing a task. By an iterative process based on generalisation and specialisation, we learn the underlying patterns that capture the different styles of performing a task exhibited by the examples. We illustrate our approach on two common activity recognition tasks: a surgical skills training task and a cooking domain. We evaluate the inferred models with respect to two metrics that measure how well the models represent the examples and capture the different forms of executing a task showed by the examples. We compare our results with the traditional process mining approach and show that a small set of meaningful examples is enough to obtain patterns that capture the different strategies that are followed to solve the tasks.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This research paper introduces a graph-based method for identifying multiple ways of performing a task.
- The approach aims to discover alternative strategies that humans may use to accomplish the same goal.
- The authors demonstrate the method on a block-stacking task, revealing diverse solution paths that people can take.
Plain English Explanation
The paper explores how people can accomplish the same task in different ways. Rather than assuming there is a single "correct" approach, the researchers developed a technique to uncover the variety of strategies people might use.
Imagine you're trying to stack a set of blocks to build a tower. One person might start by placing the largest block on the bottom, then adding smaller blocks on top. Another person could begin by creating a stable foundation with some of the smaller blocks first, then building up from there. Both approaches achieve the same goal, but they involve distinct steps and thought processes.
The researchers' graph-based method helps identify these alternative pathways. By analyzing the individual actions people take, the algorithm can map out the different sequences of steps that lead to a successful tower. This reveals the cognitive flexibility humans possess - the ability to devise multiple effective solutions to a problem.
Understanding this diversity in problem-solving techniques has implications for how we design technologies and training programs. Rather than optimizing for a single "optimal" solution, we may want to support a range of strategies that suit different people's preferences and abilities.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces a graph-based method for inferring multiple models of how people perform a task. The core idea is to represent the task as a directed graph, where nodes correspond to the state of the task (e.g., the configuration of blocks) and edges represent the actions taken to transition between states.
By analyzing the graph structure, the researchers can identify distinct "solution paths" - sequences of states and actions that lead to a successful completion of the task. These paths capture the alternative strategies people use to achieve the same goal.
The authors demonstrate their approach on a block-stacking task, where participants arranged blocks to build a tower. The graph-based method revealed a diverse set of solution paths, with significant variations in the specific sequences of actions taken.
Further analysis showed that these alternative strategies were associated with different cognitive characteristics, such as planning depth and flexibility. The research suggests that supporting multiple models of task performance, rather than optimizing for a single "optimal" approach, may be beneficial for developing effective training and assistance systems.
Critical Analysis
The paper makes a compelling case for the value of identifying multiple models of task performance. By uncovering the diversity of strategies people use, the research challenges the common assumption that there is a single "right" way to accomplish a goal.
One limitation of the study is that it focuses on a relatively simple block-stacking task. While this allowed for a clear demonstration of the graph-based method, it remains to be seen how well the approach scales to more complex, real-world tasks. Exploring the applicability of the technique in other domains would help strengthen the generalizability of the findings.
Additionally, the paper does not delve deeply into the cognitive factors that may underlie the observed differences in problem-solving strategies. Further research could investigate the relationship between individual characteristics, such as working memory capacity or cognitive style, and the propensity to adopt certain solution paths.
Overall, this research offers a promising direction for understanding and supporting the diverse ways in which people approach problem-solving. By embracing the plurality of effective strategies, we may be able to design more inclusive and adaptive technologies and training programs.
Conclusion
This paper presents a novel graph-based method for identifying multiple models of task performance. By representing a task as a directed graph and analyzing its structure, the researchers were able to uncover the diverse strategies people use to accomplish the same goal.
The findings challenge the assumption that there is a single "optimal" way to perform a task, and instead highlight the cognitive flexibility humans possess. Understanding this diversity in problem-solving approaches has important implications for the design of technologies and training systems, which often focus on optimizing for a single solution.
Overall, this research contributes to a deeper understanding of how people solve problems and opens up new avenues for developing more inclusive and adaptive support mechanisms. As we continue to explore the complex interplay between cognition, task performance, and technological assistance, studies like this one will be invaluable in guiding our efforts.
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
👁️
TAME: Task Agnostic Continual Learning using Multiple Experts
Haoran Zhu, Maryam Majzoubi, Arihant Jain, Anna Choromanska
0
0
The goal of lifelong learning is to continuously learn from non-stationary distributions, where the non-stationarity is typically imposed by a sequence of distinct tasks. Prior works have mostly considered idealistic settings, where the identity of tasks is known at least at training. In this paper we focus on a fundamentally harder, so-called task-agnostic setting where the task identities are not known and the learning machine needs to infer them from the observations. Our algorithm, which we call TAME (Task-Agnostic continual learning using Multiple Experts), automatically detects the shift in data distributions and switches between task expert networks in an online manner. At training, the strategy for switching between tasks hinges on an extremely simple observation that for each new coming task there occurs a statistically-significant deviation in the value of the loss function that marks the onset of this new task. At inference, the switching between experts is governed by the selector network that forwards the test sample to its relevant expert network. The selector network is trained on a small subset of data drawn uniformly at random. We control the growth of the task expert networks as well as selector network by employing online pruning. Our experimental results show the efficacy of our approach on benchmark continual learning data sets, outperforming the previous task-agnostic methods and even the techniques that admit task identities at both training and testing, while at the same time using a comparable model size.
6/4/2024
🏷️
Learning from One and Only One Shot
Haizi Yu, Igor Mineyev, Lav R. Varshney, James A. Evans
0
0
Humans can generalize from only a few examples and from little pretraining on similar tasks. Yet, machine learning (ML) typically requires large data to learn or pre-learn to transfer. Motivated by nativism and artificial general intelligence, we directly model human-innate priors in abstract visual tasks such as character and doodle recognition. This yields a white-box model that learns general-appearance similarity by mimicking how humans naturally ``distort'' an object at first sight. Using just nearest-neighbor classification on this cognitively-inspired similarity space, we achieve human-level recognition with only $1$--$10$ examples per class and no pretraining. This differs from few-shot learning that uses massive pretraining. In the tiny-data regime of MNIST, EMNIST, Omniglot, and QuickDraw benchmarks, we outperform both modern neural networks and classical ML. For unsupervised learning, by learning the non-Euclidean, general-appearance similarity space in a $k$-means style, we achieve multifarious visual realizations of abstract concepts by generating human-intuitive archetypes as cluster centroids.
5/22/2024
Matching Problems to Solutions: An Explainable Way of Solving Machine Learning Problems
Lokman Saleh, Hafedh Mili, Mounir Boukadoum
0
0
Domain experts from all fields are called upon, working with data scientists, to explore the use of ML techniques to solve their problems. Starting from a domain problem/question, ML-based problem-solving typically involves three steps: (1) formulating the business problem (problem domain) as a data analysis problem (solution domain), (2) sketching a high-level ML-based solution pattern, given the domain requirements and the properties of the available data, and (3) designing and refining the different components of the solution pattern. There has to be a substantial body of ML problem solving knowledge that ML researchers agree on, and that ML practitioners routinely apply to solve the most common problems. Our work deals with capturing this body of knowledge, and embodying it in a ML problem solving workbench to helps domain specialists who are not ML experts to explore the ML solution space. This paper focuses on: 1) the representation of domain problems, ML problems, and the main ML solution artefacts, and 2) a heuristic matching function that helps identify the ML algorithm family that is most appropriate for the domain problem at hand, given the domain (expert) requirements, and the characteristics of the training data. We review related work and outline our strategy for validating the workbench
6/26/2024
🔍
Imitation Learning: A Survey of Learning Methods, Environments and Metrics
Nathan Gavenski, Odinaldo Rodrigues, Michael Luck
0
0
Imitation learning is an approach in which an agent learns how to execute a task by trying to mimic how one or more teachers perform it. This learning approach offers a compromise between the time it takes to learn a new task and the effort needed to collect teacher samples for the agent. It achieves this by balancing learning from the teacher, who has some information on how to perform the task, and deviating from their examples when necessary, such as states not present in the teacher samples. Consequently, the field of imitation learning has received much attention from researchers in recent years, resulting in many new methods and applications. However, with this increase in published work and past surveys focusing mainly on methodology, a lack of standardisation became more prominent in the field. This non-standardisation is evident in the use of environments, which appear in no more than two works, and evaluation processes, such as qualitative analysis, that have become rare in current literature. In this survey, we systematically review current imitation learning literature and present our findings by (i) classifying imitation learning techniques, environments and metrics by introducing novel taxonomies; (ii) reflecting on main problems from the literature; and (iii) presenting challenges and future directions for researchers.
5/1/2024