|
Scaling up of
lexicon and action repertoire in Cognitive Agents
Description:
Incremental
Feature – lexicon acquisition
In the first
simulation we have proposed the use of the multi-dimensional MFT
in order to categorize 112 different actions. At this stage we
wanted to explore the integration of language and cognition in
cognitive robotic studies. Here we extend the multi-dimensional
MFT algorithm, used in Simulation 1, to enable the agents to
learn a lexical item to name each previous action. After
performing the action, the agents will start to describe this
action as three letter word. (consonant – vowel - consonant) see
example table 1. Each word is unique to the action performed.
This phonetic feature is dynamically added immediately after the
action. At timestep 12500, (half of the training time) both
features are considered when computing the fuzzy similarities.
From timestep 12500, the dynamics of the σ2 fuzziness value is
initialized, following equation (1), whilst σ1 continues its
decrease pattern started at timestep 0. Results in figure 1 show
that the model is able to categorize an action and assign a
‘word’ to this action.
Results:

Figure 1: Time evolution of the fields using as input the
action and phonetic feature: 112 different actions + 112 words
|
Actions |
Words |
Actions |
Words |
Actions |
Words |
Actions |
Words |
|
1 |
XUS
|
29 |
WED
|
57 |
LAC
|
85 |
KUN
|
|
2 |
GAP
|
30 |
JIL
|
58 |
BIF
|
86 |
BAM
|
|
3 |
HES
|
31 |
SAK
|
59 |
FUF
|
87 |
TOQ
|
|
4 |
LET
|
32 |
BAR
|
60 |
HOR
|
88 |
NOK
|
|
5 |
PAQ
|
33 |
JOC
|
61 |
QEB
|
89 |
TIL
|
|
6 |
PAL
|
34 |
FUV
|
62 |
WAH
|
90 |
HAW
|
|
7 |
VEH
|
35 |
MEL
|
63 |
SUD
|
91 |
JOJ
|
|
8 |
WIG
|
36 |
JAX
|
64 |
KAW
|
92 |
WOT
|
|
9 |
FUH
|
37 |
JAS
|
65 |
SAV
|
93 |
REW
|
|
10 |
TEP
|
38 |
VUS
|
66 |
QEQ
|
94 |
FUN
|
|
11 |
LUT
|
39 |
KEK
|
67 |
GES
|
95 |
QIH
|
|
12 |
COF
|
40 |
MIQ
|
68 |
WEJ
|
96 |
KUM
|
|
13 |
QUT
|
41 |
PAJ
|
69 |
KEJ
|
97 |
VEF
|
|
14 |
TUW
|
42 |
DOJ
|
70 |
LUC
|
98 |
NUH
|
|
15 |
REV
|
43 |
HER
|
71 |
KAC
|
99 |
GAC
|
|
16 |
QER
|
44 |
SAR
|
72 |
GUQ
|
100 |
KAC
|
|
17 |
BIJ
|
45 |
TOD
|
73 |
PUB
|
101 |
GUG
|
|
18 |
QUR
|
46 |
COC
|
74 |
RIV
|
102 |
QEJ
|
|
19 |
QUX
|
47 |
KAH
|
75 |
DEM
|
103 |
FUG
|
|
20 |
XAM
|
48 |
BIG
|
76 |
BER
|
104 |
KOG
|
|
21 |
BOX
|
49 |
QUW
|
77 |
WIP
|
105 |
VEX
|
|
22 |
QIH
|
50 |
PIM
|
78 |
PUP
|
106 |
WAK
|
|
23 |
PUV
|
51 |
DET
|
79 |
SIK
|
107 |
WOW
|
|
24 |
FAC
|
52 |
FUJ
|
80 |
XIT
|
108 |
BER
|
|
25 |
SIL
|
53 |
MIK
|
81 |
VEN
|
109 |
CEB
|
|
26 |
TAX
|
54 |
MEG
|
82 |
FIP
|
110 |
TOK
|
|
27 |
HUT
|
55 |
RAQ
|
83 |
SIC
|
111 |
TES
|
|
28 |
DOK
|
56 |
MAK
|
84 |
WUW
|
112 |
LOP
|
Table 1:
Table containing examples of words generated by the agents for a
specific action

Figure
2:
Teacher and learner before action is learnt and after with the
addition of the ‘word’. For visualization purposes, the word is
added on the image.
Up -
Back
|