Workshops

In-context learning refers to the ability of a neural network to learn from information presented in its context. While traditional learning in neural networks requires adjusting network weights for every new task, in-context learning operates purely by updating internal activations without needing any updates to network weights. The emergence of this ability in large language models has led to a paradigm shift in machine learning and has forced researchers to reconceptualize how they think about learning in neural networks. Looking beyond language models, we can find in-context learning in many computational models relevant to cognitive science, including those that emerge from meta-learning.

In recent years, the field of computer graphics has achieved its longstanding dream of photorealism: modern graphics algorithms produce images that are indistinguishable from reality. Much like art at the advent of photography, then, computer graphics is now turning its gaze to the beholder: researchers are increasingly looking to cognitive science to engineer new modes of visual expression. Recent work has sought to apply insights from cognitive science to a variety of traditional graphics topics: from taking a perceptual approach to perspective, to studying the theory of mind behind animation, to applying theories of abstraction learning to build tools for geometry processing.

At the same time, a wave of recent work in cognitive science has addressed fundamental questions about visual expression: for example, how humans understand and create sketches, shapes, and symbols. The field has also benefited greatly from tools and methods from computer graphics: differentiable rendering, physics simulation, and game engines have become indispensable in modeling human perception and intuitive physics. Recognizing this growing interdisciplinary exchange of ideas, we are proposing a workshop to begin building formal bridges between the cognitive science and computer graphics communities.

Compositionality, or the ability to build complex representations from discrete elements, is an essential ingredient of human intelligence. Compositionality enables people to think productively, learn fast from limited experience, and generalize knowledge to new contexts without re-learning from scratch. It is also essential in information processing systems to efficiently represent structured data and has seen application in compression and symbolic Artificial Intelligence (AI). Historically, the notion of compositionality played a central role in linguistic theory and philosophy of mind. More recently, it is attracting a surge of interest throughout the domains of cognitive science. Compositional processes are leveraged for elucidating the nature of mental representations in cognition (Dehaene et al., 2022), understanding the functional organisation of the brain (Agrawal et al., 2019), or building Artificial Intelligence systems that are robust to changes in the environment (Hupkes et al., 2020).

We have a simple thesis: the relationship between academic and industry-based cognitive science is broken but can be fixed. Over the last few decades, there has been a huge increase in the representation of cognitive science in industry. Beyond just machine learning, businesses are increasingly interested in human behavior and cognitive processes. Large proportions of our Ph.D. students, post-docs, and even faculty choose to go through a largely one-way door to corporate jobs in data science, behavioral experimentation, machine learning, user experience, and elsewhere. Currently, people who choose industry careers often lose their social and intellectual networks and their ability to return to tenure-track positions, and valuable insights from industry about memory, decision-making, learning, emotion, distributed cognition, and much more never return to the academic community. We believe that deep, theory driven, theory building work is being done in industry settings–and that the rift between the communities is making our scientific work less effective than it could be.

Like any science, cognitive science rests upon a set of conceptual foundations. Traditionally, cognition has been compartmentalized into distinct processes such as perception, memory, attention, emotion, cognitive control, language, and others. Further, the disciplines studying these different constructs have developed their own conceptual systems. For example, emotion science studies anger, fear, and happiness, whereas memory research has articulated varieties such as long-term, short-term, working, and episodic memory. These conceptual systems serve as key scientific tools, influencing processes from the development of new measurement instruments and deciding on which experiments to conduct to developing new theories and communicating results (Feest, 2010; Dubova & Goldstone, 2023). Although critically important for scientific progress, these concepts, often stemming from the folk taxonomies or the perspectives of early visionaries, have not always been subjected to rigorous scrutiny. To address these issues, cognitive scientists are beginning to critically re-evaluate and possibly reframe the conceptual underpinnings of cognitive disciplines (e.g. Cisek, 2019; Poldrack et al., 2011; Musslick et al., 2020), yet such efforts often lack strategic direction and widely diverge in their methodological ways of approaching the task.

The goal of this workshop is to initiate an interdisciplinary conversation about reconceptualizing cognitive science disciplines. This workshop will bring together researchers proposing new conceptualizations in their disciplines, cognitive scientists investigating the mechanisms of concept learning and the role of concepts in human cognition, researchers building infrastructures to study and improve cognitive concepts, and philosophers analyzing scientific conceptualizations. The workshop will include activities which will prompt the audience to think about the conceptual foundations of their respective areas, and about ways to improve these foundations. These activities are designed to maximize audience participation and include panel discussions, as well as mind-matching sessions. One of the outcomes of the workshop is identifying the diversity of approaches for improving cognitive science concepts that could be relevant to both discipline-wide and more specific efforts.