Main Page Contents
Schedule
Requirements
News
About this course
Syllabus
Materials
|
Schedule
Class
Wednesday 1:10-4:10, Hill 120.
Office Hours
Tuesday 3-5, Psych A103.
Requirements
Weekly readings, serving as a principal discussant of suitable
papers during the semester, and a final project involving a paper
and/or programming. Interdisciplinary project collaborations are
especially welcomed.
News
- Thu, Dec 2
Slides posted.
Final project deadline extended, to Dec 15.
- Mon, Nov 15
Slides posted.
- Thu, Nov 4
Slides posted.
- Mon, Oct 25
Slides posted.
Alternative readings for week of Nov 12 (clarification).
- Fri, Oct 22
Guidelines for breakout session
posted.
Guidelines for project proposal
posted.
- Thu, Oct 14
Slides posted.
- Thu, Oct 7
Handout posted; slight adjustment of schedule.
- Thu, Sep 30
Slides posted.
- Tue, Sep 21
Readings for Stalnaker and Lewis posted.
- Mon, Sep 20
Slides posted.
New PDF for readings files with better-quality scanning
(no paper feed glitches).
- Thu, Sep 9
Slides posted.
- Fri, Sep 3
Class date moved.
Rough copies of Ballard and Brennan readings.
- Thu, Aug 18
This page created.
Class meeting time is still somewhat flexible: Tuesday and
Wednesday afternoons and Wednesday mornings are also candidates.
If you have a conflict with the set meeting time let me know, and
indicate your availability for possible alternatives.
Most readings are available here; in some cases, I'm still
tracking down clean copies. Where possible, I link to the
publisher's electronic copy. Otherwise, I link to the
author's. As a last resort, I link to a locally scanned
version. This will be accessible within the rutgers.edu domain
only. Scanned material will also be made available through
electronic reserve.
Not every page of every reading is crucial. As readings get
close, I'll highlight the key issues and key passages that I think
it makes most sense to focus on.
About this Course
This course looks at semantics specifically from the
perspective of cognitive science. In cognitive science, the project
of semantics is to explain how intelligent agents can come to share
mental content using natural language. This project folds together
investigations of mental content normally pursued in the philosophy
of mind, investigations of the structure of knowledge of language
normally pursued in linguistics, and investigations of embodied
perception and action normally pursued in psychology.
Two complementary ideas motivate this integrated
investigation. The first is the suggestion that mental content is
indexical. In other words, an agent's mental representations derive
their meanings from the agent's interactions with its environment,
not from the agent's general abilities to perform inference or make
decisions. The second is the suggestion that language use is
collaborative. In other words, when we exchange meaningful
utterances, what we are doing, fundamentally, is working together
to achieve a shared understanding of what we say in context.
If these suggestions are right, agents' knowledge of language
cannot be separated from their experience in the world or from
their abilities to interact cooperatively with other agents. Put
most contentiously, we will only have an adequate scientific
account of linguistic meaning when we can build machines that work
with us to capture the meanings of our utterances in
representations that are suitably grounded in the machines' own
perception and action. Hence the title of this class: Meaning
Machines a phrase due to Deb Roy, Assistant
Professor at the Media Lab, MIT.
Computation provides the setting for this investigation in
part, of course, because these meaning machines hold practical
interest. More importantly, computation provides a rigorous
methodology for formulating theories in cognitive science and an
attractive framework for cognitive modeling. Every cognitive
scientist should aspire to a concrete understanding of programs and
processes in explanations of mental intentionality and intelligent
behavior.
Syllabus
- Sep 02
Introduction: AI, meaning and its critics.
Lecture Notes
M.
Stone. Intention, interpretation and the computational structure of
language. Cognitive Science 28(5), 2004.
M. Stone,
D. DeCarlo, I. Oh, C. Rodriguez, A. Stere, A. Lees and
C. Bregler. Speaking with Hands: Creating Animated Conversational
Characters from Recordings of Human Performance.
In SIGGRAPH 2004.
Supplementary:
P. Agre. Computation and Human
Experience, Chapter 1, pages 1-26. Cambridge University Press,
1997.
J. Fodor. "Methodological solipsism
considered as a research strategy in cognitive psychology".
Chapter 11 of Mind Design: Philosophy, Psychology, Artificial
Intelligence, edited by J. Haugeland, pages 307-338. MIT
Press, 1981.
D. McDermott. "Artificial
intelligence meets natural stupidity". Chapter 5 of Mind
Design: Philsophy, Psychology, Artificial Intelligence, edited
by J. Haugeland, pages 143-160. MIT Press, 1981.
T. Winograd and F. Flores.
Understanding computers and cognition: A new foundation for
design, Chapters 8 and 9, pages 93-124. Addison-Wesley,
1986.
- Sep 08
Mental content and linguistic meaning.
Lecture Notes
H. Putnam. "The meaning of
`meaning'". Chapter 12 of Mind, Language and Reality:
Philosophical Papers Volume 2, pages 215-271. Cambridge
University Press, 1975.
J. Fodor.
Language, thought and compositionality. Mind and Language
16(1):1-15, 2001.
S. Kripke. Naming and
Necessity, pages 116-140 (excerpted from Lecture 3). Reprinted
by Harvard University Press, 1980.
D. Davidson. "What is present to
the mind?" Chapter 4 of Subjective, Intersubjective,
Objective, pages 53-67. Clarendon Press, 2001.
- Sep 15
Indexicality and the grounding of mental representations:
Objects.
Z.
Pylyshyn. Situating vision in the world. Trends in the Cognitive
Sciences 4(5):197-207, 2000.
Discussion led by Iris Oved.
Supplementary: P. Agre.
Computation and Human Experience, pages 222-301. Cambridge
University Press, 1997.
Additional notes.
Further references:
- D. Kirsh. The intelligent use of space. Artificial
Intelligence 1995.
- D. Lewis. Attitudes De Dicto and De Se. Philosophical
Review 88:513 - 543, 1979.
- Some change
blindness demos.
- Sep 22
Indexicality and the grounding of mental representations:
Events.
D. H. Ballard, M. M. Hayhoe,
P. K. Pook, R. P. N. Rao. Deictic codes for the embodiment of
cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20:723-767,
1997.
Lecture notes.
Supplementary:
J. M. Siskind.
Reconstructing force-dynamic models from video sequences.
Artificial Intelligence 151(1-2):91-154, 2003.
Discussion led by Juan Ramos.
- Sep 29
Language use as collaborative.
H. P. Grice. Meaning. The Philosophical Review
66, 1957.
Discussion led by Michael Cole.
Supplementary:
H. Clark. Using Language,
pages 191-252. Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Discussion led by Judy Bauer.
- Oct 06
Language, action and context.
D. Lewis. Scorekeeping in a language game. In Semantics from
Different Points of View, edited by R. Bäuerle et al,
1979.
R. Stalnaker. Pragmatic
Presuppositions. In Semantics and Philosophy, edited by
M. Munitz and P. Unger, 1974.
R. Stalnaker. Assertion. In Pragmatics: Syntax and Semantics
9, edited by P. Cole, 1979.
Discussion led by Adrian Brasoveanu.
- Oct 13
Conversational goals.
B. J. Grosz
and C. L. Sidner. Attention, intentions and the structure of
discourse. Computational Linguistics. 12(3):175-204,
1986.
Discussion led by Juan Ramos.
D. Traum and
J. Allen. Discourse obligations in dialogue processing.
Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Association for
Computational Linguistics, pages 1-8, 1994.
Discussion led by Anubha Kothari.
- Oct 20
Conversational processes.
S. Brennan and H. Clark.
Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition
22:1482-1493, 1996.
Discussion led by Sinuk Kang.
Y. Nakano,
G. Reinstein, T. Stocky and J. Cassell. Towards a model of
face-to-face grounding. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting
of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2003.
Discussion led by Insuk Oh.
Next week's discussion target: Grounding
language in the world: Signs, Schemas and Meaning. Deb Roy.
Unpublished draft, MIT Media Lab, 2004. Slightly revised version,
now more generally available.
Overview presentation by Rati Sharma.
Project website
- Oct 27
Breakout sessions: The requirements of meaning.
Guidelines.
Results:
- Nov 03
Case study: Reference.
P. Gorniak
and D. Roy. Grounded Semantic Composition for Visual Scenes.
Journal of AI Research 21:429-470.
Discussion led by David DeVault.
Project proposals due.
- Nov 10
Case study: Ellipsis and clarification.
M. Purver. The Theory and Use of
Clarification Requests in Dialogue. PhD Thesis, University of
London, 2004, Chapters 3 and 6.
Lecture Notes.
J. Ginzburg. Disentangling
public from private meaning. In R. Smith and J. van Kuppevelt,
eds., New Directions in Discourse and Dialogue,
2003.
Discussion led by Adam Sennet.
- Nov 17
Case study: Vagueness.
A. Kyburg and M. Morreau. Fitting
words: vague words in context. Linguistics and Philosophy
23:577-597, 2000.
C. Barker. The dynamics of
vagueness. Linguistics and Philosophy 25:1-36,
2002.
Discussion led by Adrian Brasoveanu.
Supplementary:
D. Graff. Shifting sands: an
interest-relative theory of vagueness. Philosophical Topics
28(1):45-81, 2000.
- Dec 01
Case study: Learning meaning.
P. Bloom. How Children Learn the
Meanings of Words, Chapters 3-4, pages 55-120. MIT Press,
2000.
Discussion led by Lynn Chan.
Supplementary:
D. Roy
and A. Pentland. Learning words from sights and sounds: a
computational model. Cognitive Science 26(1):113-146,
2002.
Discussion led by Xiaoxu Wang.
- Dec 08
Final presentations.
|