Explainability Through Systematicity: The Hard Systematicity Challenge for Artificial Intelligence
This paper argues that explainability is only one facet of a broader ideal that shapes our expectations towards artificial intelligence (AI). Fundamentally, the issue is to what extent AI exhibits systematicity--not merely in being sensitive to how thoughts are composed of recombinable constituents, but in striving towards an integrated body of thought that is consistent, coherent, comprehensive, and parsimoniously principled. This richer conception of systematicity has been obscured by the long shadow of the "systematicity challenge" to connectionism, according to which network architectures are fundamentally at odds with what Fodor and colleagues termed "the systematicity of thought." I offer a conceptual framework for thinking about "the systematicity of thought" that distinguishes four senses of the phrase. I use these distinctions to defuse the perceived tension between systematicity and connectionism and show that the conception of systematicity that historically shaped our sense of what makes thought rational, authoritative, and scientific is more demanding than the Fodorian notion. To determine whether we have reason to hold AI models to this ideal of systematicity, I then argue, we must look to the rationales for systematization and explore to what extent they transfer to AI models. I identify five such rationales and apply them to AI. This brings into view the "hard systematicity challenge." However, the demand for systematization itself needs to be regulated by the rationales for systematization. This yields a dynamic understanding of the need to systematize thought, which tells us how systematic we need AI models to be and when.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Revisiting the Systematicity in Negation in the Era of In-Context Learning
Understanding the meaning of negated sentences remains one of the challenges for language models, even in the era of large language models (LLMs). We analyze systematicity regarding LLM understanding of negation from two…
Behavioural vs. Representational Systematicity in End-to-End Models: An Opinionated Survey
A core aspect of compositionality, systematicity is a desirable property in ML models as it enables strong generalization to novel contexts. This has led to numerous studies proposing benchmarks to assess systematic gene…
Systematic GeneralizationThought without systematicity? Evaluating reasoning models on rule induction tasks
A central tenet of human cognition is systematicity, the principle that understanding one concept is inherently tied to understanding close variations of that concept. Do reasoning models robustly exhibit such systematic…
Fodor and Pylyshyn's Systematicity Challenge Still Stands
The recent successes of neural networks producing human-like language have caused significant stir in cognitive science, with many researchers arguing that classical puzzles about human cognition and challenges to artifi…
SETI: Systematicity Evaluation of Textual Inference
We propose SETI (Systematicity Evaluation of Textual Inference), a novel and comprehensive benchmark designed for evaluating pre-trained language models (PLMs) for their systematicity capabilities in the domain of textua…