Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This paper proposes using machine learning models as "cognitive thermometers" to measure semantic complexity, offering a more agnostic alternative to traditional logical definitions that are sensitive to arbitrary language choices. The study demonstrates convergence between symbolic logic and connectionist AI in explaining why natural languages favor certain meanings, suggesting ML provides superior explanatory power where the two approaches diverge. By bridging these paradigms, the work advances our understanding of how human minds represent categories through data-driven complexity metrics rather than purely formal logical constraints.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Cognitive Thermometers: Machine Learning and Logical Complexity

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2610.10724v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: How does the human mind represent semantic categories? Why do natural languages favor certain meanings over others? Prior explanations have relied on logical definability and complexity, but these are highly sensitive to the choice of logical language, rendering some design choices unmotivated. In this article, we propose that machine learning provides a somewhat more agnostic approach to measuring semantic complexity. We review emerging evidence that logic and machine learning often yield converging results on relative complexity and its resulting effects in semantic typology. Where they diverge, learning appears to be a better explanation than logical complexity. We argue that treating machine learning models as ``cognitive thermometers'' enables a unified approach to complexity that bridges symbolic logic and connectionist AI.

Abstract:How does the human mind represent semantic categories? Why do natural languages favor certain meanings over others? Prior explanations have relied on logical definability and complexity, but these are highly sensitive to the choice of logical language, rendering some design choices unmotivated. In this article, we propose that machine learning provides a somewhat more agnostic approach to measuring semantic complexity. We review emerging evidence that logic and machine learning often yield converging results on relative complexity and its resulting effects in semantic typology. Where they diverge, learning appears to be a better explanation than logical complexity. We argue that treating machine learning models as ``cognitive thermometers'' enables a unified approach to complexity that bridges symbolic logic and connectionist AI.

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2610.10724 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2610.10724v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.10724 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 214 words

Related coverage