United States

The Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) is a collection program induction tasks that was recently proposed by Chollet (2019) as a measure of machine intelligence. Here, we report a preliminary set of results from a behavioral study of humans solving a subset of tasks from ARC (40 out of 1000). We found that humans were able to infer the underlying program and generate the correct test output for a novel test input example, with an average of 84% of tasks solved per participant, and with 65% of tasks being solved by more than 80% of participants. Additionally, we find interesting patterns of behavioral consistency and variability across the action sequences to generate their responses, the natural language descriptions used to describe the rule for each task, and the errors people make. Our findings suggest that people can quickly and reliably determine the relevant features and properties of a task to compose a correct solution, despite limited experience in this domain. This dataset offers useful insights for designing AI systems that can solve abstract reasoning tasks such as ARC with the fluidity of human intelligence.

CogSci 2021

Fast and Flexible: Human program induction in abstract reasoning tasks

### Welcome to CogSci Conference 2025!

The 47th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society was a hybrid meeting held in San Francisco. 

<div style="position:relative;padding-top:0;width:900px;height:500px;"><iframe style="position:absolute;border:none;width:100%;height:100%;left:0;top:0;" src="https://online.fliphtml5.com/ebtyf/amvr/"  seamless="seamless" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" ></iframe></div>

#### About

The Cognitive Science Society brings together researchers from around the world who hold a common goal: understanding the nature of the human mind. The mission of the Society is to promote Cognitive Science as a discipline, and to foster scientific interchange among researchers in various areas of study, including Artificial Intelligence, Linguistics, Anthropology, Psychology, Neuroscience, Philosophy, and Education.

The Society is a non-profit professional organization and its activities include sponsoring an annual conference and publishing the journals Cognitive Science and TopiCS.

#### Our History 

* **Society Creation**<br>
The Society was incorporated as a 501(c)(3) non-profit professional organization in Massachusetts in 1979. The organizing committee included Roger Schank, Allan Collins, Donald Norman, and a number of other scholars from psychology, linguistics, computer science, and philosophy. 
<br><br>
* **Conference Creation**<br>
The first conference on cognitive science was held at La Jolla, California in August, 1979, and has occurred annually since then. The proceedings of each conference are published, and those from most years are available through Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. The annual proceedings of the Cognitive Science Conference represent a major source of information on new work and new ideas in the scientific study of thinking. In 1990, the Society, with help from an anonymous donor, established the David Marr Prize for the best student paper at each annual meeting.
<br><br>
* **Journal Creation**<br>
The Journal, Cognitive Science, began publication in 1976, and is now published by Wiley-Blackwell. The Executive Editor is currently Richard P. Cooper of Birkbeck, University of London, and there are 18 Associate Editors and a 30-member editorial board. It serves as the premier outlet for research reports that intersect two or more disciplines. Copyrights for articles published in the journal are held by the Society. The Governing Board of the Cognitive Science Society voted in late 2006 to found a new journal, Topics in Cognitive Science (topiCS). The Editor in Chief is Wayne Gray, Cognitive Science Department, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. The journal seeks to fill a niche not occupied by Cognitive Science Journal or other cognitive science journals. Membership in the Society includes a subscription to Cognitive Science and TopiCS. Copyrights for articles published in the journal are held by the Society.
<br><br>

#### Code of Conduct

By attending the CogSci 2025 Conference, you are required to adhere to the society’s **[Code of Conduct](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ChPuihLy6jE_BWqfO7J2KKgX35JW2zsM/view?usp=sharing)**.
<br><br>


You need to log in with the email address you registered with. 

Login credentials were sent to you from Underline -  subject line "Welcome to the CogSci 2025 Conference". Please be sure to check your spam/promotional inbox  if you do not see an email confirmation right away.





Please log in to join this event.

To access the site, please register [**here**](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/registration/).

If you are registered and feel like you are seeing this message by mistake, please make sure you are logged in with the same email that you registered with. 

Please register!

CogSci 2025

The 47th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society presents the latest research across cognitive science and highlights the theme of Cognition in Context.

poster

### Looking for Cogsci 2023? Please [click here](https://underline.io/events/405/reception) to switch to 2023 edition.


**Dear Colleagues,**

Welcome to the 43rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society! 

This year’s conference brings together the latest research from all Cognitive Science and also highlights this year’s theme **Comparative Cognition: Animal Minds.** 

The program features four plenary speakers: Friederike Range (University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna), Onur Güntürkün (Ruhr University Bochum), Julia Fischer (University of Göttingen), and Erich Jarvis (The Rockefeller University). The keynotes and invited symposia showcase the broad spectrum of ideas that encompass the conference theme of comparative cognition. 

Further, the program includes the Rumelhart Prize keynote presentation by Susan Goldin-Meadow (University of Chicago), and symposia to celebrate the winner of the Elman Prize: Wei Ji Ma (New York University), the Heineken Award winner Robert Zatorre (McGill University), and the Robert J. Glushko Dissertation Prizes session.

The program committee for CogSci 2021 received 1,025 submissions, including 710 full papers, 275 member abstracts, 8 publication-based talks, as well as 15 proposals for symposia, and 17 for workshops and tutorials. After a rigorous review process, the committee selected 152 papers for oral presentation and inclusion in the conference proceedings (14.8%), 332 papers for poster presentation and inclusion in the proceedings (32.4%), and 175 papers for poster presentation with inclusion of abstracts in the proceedings (17.1%) We also selected 275 submitted member abstracts. In addition, we accepted 6 publication-based talks, 12 symposia, and 9 workshops and tutorials to make for an exciting and inclusive program.

We hope that you enjoy the conference this year!<br><br>

**Your Program Chairs,**
![](https://assets.underline.io/uploads/markdown_image/1/image/99984908caba5e6453e5fc5ba34f3507.jpg)

**Learn more about the Vienna Cognitive Science Hub at the University of Vienna, hosts of CogSci 2021**

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/464h1m3iU68" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

To review the proceedings for the conference or review the searchable program, please visit the [website](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/program/).


The Cognitive Science Society brings together researchers from around the world who hold a common goal: understanding the nature of the human mind. The mission of the Society is to promote Cognitive Science as a discipline, and to foster scientific interchange among researchers in various areas of study, including Artificial Intelligence, Linguistics, Anthropology, Psychology, Neuroscience, Philosophy, and Education. The Society is a non-profit professional organization and its activities include sponsoring an annual conference and publishing the journals Cognitive Science and TopiCS.

Context-sensitive communication not only requires speakers to choose relevant utterances from alternatives, but also to retrieve and evaluate the relevant utterances from memory in the first place. In this work, we compared different proposals about how underlying semantic representations work together with higher-level selection processes to enable individuals to flexibly utilize context to guide their language use. We examined speaker and guesser performance in a two-player iterative language game based on Codenames, which asks speakers to choose a single `clue' word that allows their partner to select a pair of target words from a context of distractors. The descriptive analyses indicated that speakers were sensitive to the shared semantic neighborhood of the target word pair and were able to use guesser feedback to shift their clues closer to the unguessed word. We also formulated a series of computational models combining different semantic representations with different selection processes. Model comparisons suggested that a model which integrated contextualized lexical representations based on association networks with a contextualized model of pragmatic reasoning was better able to predict behavior in the game compared to models that lacked context at either the representational or process level. Our findings suggest that flexibility in communication is driven by context-sensitivity at at the level of both representations and processes.

Contextual Flexibility Guides Communication in a Cooperative Language Game

Political ideology leads educated adults–especially the highly numerate–to selectively reason about numbers that support their beliefs (“motivated numeracy”). We investigated whether supports that help children’s quantitative reasoning (number-lines) might also help political partisans. To test this, we asked 429 adults to interpret fictional data, in table or number-line format, about the effect of gun control on crime or the effect of a skin cream on rashes. We found data presented in number-line formats yielded greater accuracy than table formats controlling for numeracy skills (χ2 (1) = 21.88, p < .001), regardless of whether the true interpretation of data affirms, neutral to, or disaffirms participants’ political outlooks. Solving table problems after number-line problems yielded greater accuracy compared to solving table problems first (χ2 (1) = 4.78, p < .005), suggesting number-line practice is educational. Our research has important implications for communicating policy data and improving objectivity.

Cognitive Supports for Objective Numeracy

We make frequent decisions about how to manage our health, yet do so with information that is highly complex or received piecemeal. Causal models can provide guidance about how components of a complex system interact, yet models that provide a complete causal story may be more complex than people can reason about. Prior work has provided mixed insights into our ability to make decisions with causal models, showing that people can use them in novel domains but that they may impede decisions in familiar ones. We examine how tailoring causal information to the question at hand may aid decision making, using simple diagrams with only the relevant causal paths (Experiment 1) or those paths highlighted within a complex causal model (Experiment 2). We find that diagrams tailored to a choice improve decision accuracy over complex diagrams or prior knowledge, providing new evidence for how causal models can aid decisions.

It's Complicated: Improving Decisions on Causally Complex Topics

The development of mobility technologies has led to the concept of shared spaces. In the shared space, mobilities and pedestrians share a single common space. Compared to conventional separated spaces, cooperative behaviors are critical in shared spaces because all agents can move freely at their own speed and in their directions with few constraints. An experiment was conducted using indices for own cost, others' benefit, and own loss to reveal the nature of the cooperative behaviors associated with moving. We found that compared to when people are encouraged to behave without urgency, they frequently change their speed and direction so as not to interrupt others and reach their destination more quickly when people are required to behave cooperatively. Therefore, it was concluded that both others' benefit and one's own benefit are critical for cooperative behaviors when moving in shared spaces.

What is the Cooperative Behavior of Moving in Shared Spaces?

Social media users are generally exposed to information that is predominantly consistent with their attitudes and beliefs (i.e., filter bubbles), which can increase polarization and decrease understanding of complex and controversial topics. One potential approach to mitigating the negative consequences of filter bubbles is intentional exposure to information that is inconsistent with attitudes. However, it is unclear how exposure to attitude-inconsistent information in social media contexts influences memory for controversial information. To fill this gap, this study examines the effects of presenting participants (n = 96) with Twitter content on a controversial topic (i.e., labor unions) that was either pro-union, anti-union, or neutral. Participants then read a media article including both pro-union and anti-union information. Participants who saw Twitter content that was inconsistent with their prior attitudes regarding labor unions recalled less of the article content compared to those who saw Twitter content that was consistent with their prior attitudes. The findings suggest that Twitter users’ memory for information related to controversial topics may not benefit from exposure to messages outside their filter bubble.

Social Media Spillover: Attitude-Inconsistent Tweets Reduce Memory for Subsequent Information

We introduce and implement a cognitively plausible model for learning from generic language, statements that express generalizations about members of a category and are an important aspect of concept development in language acquisition (Carlson & Pelletier, 1995; Gelman, 2009). We extend a computational framework designed to model grounded language acquisition by introducing the concept network. This new layer of abstraction enables the system to encode knowledge learned from generic statements and represent the associations between concepts learned by the system. Through three tasks that utilize the concept network, we demonstrate that our extensions to ADAM can acquire generic information and provide an example of how ADAM can be used to model language acquisition.

A Grounded Approach to Modeling Generic Knowledge Acquisition

Recent work has paired classic category learning models with convolutional neural networks (CNNs), allowing researchers to study categorization behavior from raw image inputs. However, this research typically uses naturalistic images, which assess participant responses to existing categories; yet, much of traditional category learning research has focused on using novel, artificial stimuli to examine the learning process behind how people acquire categories. In this work, we pair a CNN with ALCOVE (Kruschke, 1992), a well-known exemplar model of categorization, and attempt to examine whether this model can reproduce the classic type ordering effect from Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961) on raw images rather than abstract features. We examine this question with a variety of CNN architectures and image datasets and compare ALCOVE-CNN to two other models that lacked certain key features of ALCOVE. We found that our ALCOVE-CNN model could reproduce the type ordering effect more often than the other models we tested, but in limited situations. Our results showed that success varied greatly across the various configurations we tested, suggesting that the feature representations from CNNs provide strong constraints in properly capturing this effect.

Modeling artificial category learning from pixels: Revisiting Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961) with deep neural networks

The framework of emotional Biologically Inspired Cognitive Architecture (eBICA) is used to define a cognitive model, producing believable socially emotional behavior in social interaction paradigms in a virtual environment. The paradigm selected for this study is a virtual pet (a penguin) interacting with a human user. Its implementation in Unity on a desktop PC in two versions, with and without an Oculus VR headset, was used in experiments involving 20 college student participants. Several versions of the model were compared. Results support the validity of the eBICA framework and indicate that the combination of somatic factors, cognitive appraisals and moral schemas in one model has the potential to make behavior of a virtual actor believable and socially attractive. At the same time, partial randomization of behavior does not affect the general result. The work has implications for the design of future emotionally intelligent collaborative robots and virtual assistants.

A virtual actor with socially emotional behavior

To infer what others know, we must consider under what epistemic states their actions were both rational and probable. We test whether preschoolers can compare the probability of different actions (and outcomes) under different epistemic states—and use this to evaluate what others know. Specifically, four- to six-year-olds (n=90) were asked to help evaluate an agent’s knowledge state by asking the agent to complete either an “undiagnostic” task (where success was assured), or a “diagnostic task” (where the probability of random success was low). By age six, children understood that the “diagnostic” task would more likely reveal the agent’s knowledge state; four- and five-year-olds had no reliable preference, although children in all age groups understood that the “diagnostic” task was harder. These results suggest that, by the end of preschool, children understand how agents’ epistemic states and environment jointly determine success—considering whether agents’ actions imply knowledge, or just luck.

Children consider the probability of random success when evaluating knowledge

People think and learn abstractly and compositionally. These two key properties of human cognition are shared with natural language: we use a finite, composable vocabulary of nameable concepts to generate and understand a combinatorially large space of new sentence. In this paper, we present a domain of compositional reasoning tasks and an artificial language learning paradigm designed to probe the role language plays in bootstrapping learning. We discuss results from a language-guided program learning model suggesting that language can play an important role in bootstrapping learning by providing an important signal for search on individual problems, and a cue towards named, reusable abstractions across the domain as a whole. We evaluate adults on the same domain, comparing learning performance between those tasked with jointly learning language and solving reasoning tasks, and those who only approach the domain as a collection of inductive reasoning problems. We find that adults provided with abstract language prompts are better equipped to generalize and compose concepts learned across a domain than adults solving the same problems using reasoning alone.

Downloads

Next from CogSci 2021

Contextual Flexibility Guides Communication in a Cooperative Language Game

Similar lecture

A Neurosymbolic Model of Human Reasoning on the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES