Source author record

Gary Marcus

Explore this author’s publications, collaborators and research topics. This catalog record has not been claimed by its author.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Artificial Intelligence Computation and Language Machine Learning

Catalog footprint

Research overview

3works

3topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Is this your work?

Open graph Browse papers

preprint2020arXiv

A Review of Winograd Schema Challenge Datasets and Approaches

The Winograd Schema Challenge is both a commonsense reasoning and natural language understanding challenge, introduced as an alternative to the Turing test. A Winograd schema is a pair of sentences differing in one or two words with a highly ambiguous pronoun, resolved differently in the two sentences, that appears to require commonsense knowledge to be resolved correctly. The examples were designed to be easily solvable by humans but difficult for machines, in principle requiring a deep understanding of the content of the text and the situation it describes. This paper reviews existing Winograd Schema Challenge benchmark datasets and approaches that have been published since its introduction.

preprint2020arXiv

The Next Decade in AI: Four Steps Towards Robust Artificial Intelligence

Recent research in artificial intelligence and machine learning has largely emphasized general-purpose learning and ever-larger training sets and more and more compute. In contrast, I propose a hybrid, knowledge-driven, reasoning-based approach, centered around cognitive models, that could provide the substrate for a richer, more robust AI than is currently possible.

preprint2015arXiv

The Scope and Limits of Simulation in Cognitive Models

It has been proposed that human physical reasoning consists largely of running "physics engines in the head" in which the future trajectory of the physical system under consideration is computed precisely using accurate scientific theories. In such models, uncertainty and incomplete knowledge is dealt with by sampling probabilistically over the space of possible trajectories ("Monte Carlo simulation"). We argue that such simulation-based models are too weak, in that there are many important aspects of human physical reasoning that cannot be carried out this way, or can only be carried out very inefficiently; and too strong, in that humans make large systematic errors that the models cannot account for. We conclude that simulation-based reasoning makes up at most a small part of a larger system that encompasses a wide range of additional cognitive processes.

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.