Topics in Cognitive Science 5 (1):56-88 (2013)

Abstract
A U-shaped curve in a cognitive-developmental trajectory refers to a three-step process: good performance followed by bad performance followed by good performance once again. U-shaped curves have been observed in a wide variety of cognitive-developmental and learning contexts. U-shaped learning seems to contradict the idea that learning is a monotonic, cumulative process and thus constitutes a challenge for competing theories of cognitive development and learning. U-shaped behavior in language learning (in particular in learning English past tense) has become a central topic in the Cognitive Science debate about learning models. Antagonist models (e.g., connectionism versus nativism) are often judged on their ability of modeling or accounting for U-shaped behavior. The prior literature is mostly occupied with explaining how U-shaped behavior occurs. Instead, we are interested in the necessity of this kind of apparently inefficient strategy. We present and discuss a body of results in the abstract mathematical setting of (extensions of) Gold-style computational learning theory addressing a mathematically precise version of the following question: Are there learning tasks that require U-shaped behavior? All notions considered are learning in the limit from positive data. We present results about the necessity of U-shaped learning in classical models of learning as well as in models with bounds on the memory of the learner. The pattern emerges that, for parameterized, cognitively relevant learning criteria, beyond very few initial parameter values, U-shapes are necessary for full learning power! We discuss the possible relevance of the above results for the Cognitive Science debate about learning models as well as directions for future research
Keywords Mathematical necessity  Computability‐theoretic learning theory  Self‐referential programs  U‐shaped learning  Learning criteria  Cognitive development
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/tops.12002
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 62,481
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

View all 26 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Can Cognitive Neuroscience Ground a Science of Learning?Anthony E. Kelly - 2011 - Educational Philosophy and Theory 43 (1):17-23.
Human Semi-Supervised Learning.Bryan R. Gibson, Timothy T. Rogers & Xiaojin Zhu - 2013 - Topics in Cognitive Science 5 (1):132-172.
Symbolic Versus Associative Learning.John E. Hummel - 2010 - Cognitive Science 34 (6):958-965.
Attention and Awareness in Sequence Learning.Axel Cleeremans - forthcoming - Proceedings of the Fiftheenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society:227-232.
Neural Models of Development and Learning.Stephen Grossberg - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (4):566-566.
A Single-Process Learning Theory.Marion Blute - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (3):529-531.
Conceptual Development and the Paradox of Learning.Michael Luntley - 2008 - Journal of Philosophy of Education 42 (1):1-14.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-03-01

Total views
119 ( #88,942 of 2,446,285 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #456,806 of 2,446,285 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes