Skip to main content

A Subsymbolic and Symbolic Model for Learning Sequential Decision Tasks

  • Chapter
Deep Fusion of Computational and Symbolic Processing

Part of the book series: Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing ((STUDFUZZ,volume 59))

  • 111 Accesses

Abstract

For dealing with reactive sequential decision tasks, a learning model Clarion was developed, which is a hybrid connectionist model consisting of both localist (symbolic) and distributed representations, based on the two-level approach proposed in Sun (1995). The model learns and utilizes procedural and declarative knowledge, tapping into the synergy of the two types of processes. It unifies neural, reinforcement, and symbolic methods to perform on-line, bottom-up learning (from subsymbolic to symbolic knowledge). Experiments in various situations shed light on the working of the model. Its theoretical implications in terms of symbol grounding are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • J. R. Anderson, (1983). The Architecture of Cognition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Bertsekas and J. Tsitsiklis, (1996). Neuro-Dynamic Programming. Athena Scientific, Belmont, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Breiuran, (1996). Bagging predictors. Machine Learning, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 123–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Dreyfus and S. Dreyfus, (1987). Mind Over Machine. The Free Press, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Fisher, (1987). Knowledge acquisition via incremental conceptual clustering. Machine Learning. 2, 139–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Fitts and M. Posner, (1967). Human Performance. Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Hamad, (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D, 42, 335–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • H. Hirsh, (1994). Generalizing version spaces. Machine Learning, 17, 5–46.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • W. James, (1890). The Principles of Psychology. Dover, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • L. Kaelbling, M. Littman, and A. Moore, (1996). Reinforcement learning: A survey. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 4, 237–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • F. Keil, (1989). Concepts, Kinds, and Cognitive Development. MIT Press. Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • N. Lavrac and S. Dzeroski, (1994). Inductive Logic Programming. Lllis Horword, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Lin, (1992). Self-improving reactive agents based on reinforcement learning, plan-ning, and teaching. Machine Learning. Vol. 8, pp. 293–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Michalski, (1983). A theory and methodology of inductive learning. Artificial Intelligence. Vol.20, pp.111–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • T. Mitchell, (1982). Generalization as search. Artificial Intelligence, 18, 203–226.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • G. Monohan, (1982). A survey of partially observable Markov decision processes: theory, models, and algorithms. Management Science, 28 (1), 1–16.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • R. Quinlan, (1986). Inductive learning of decision trees. Machine Learning. 1, 81–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Rosenbloom, J. Laird, A. Newell, and R. McCarl, (1991). A preliminary analysis of the SOAR architecture as a basis for general intelligence. Artificial Intelligence. 47 (1–3), 289–325.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Technology. 213–225. U. of New Hampshire, Durham.

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Smolensky, (1988). On the proper treatment of connectionism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11 (1): 1–74.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • R. Sun, (1992). On variable binding in connectionist networks, Connection Science, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 93–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R. Sun, (1994). Integrating. Rules and Connectionism for Robust Commonsense Reasoning. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Sun, (1995). Robust reasoning: integrating rule-based and similarity-based reasoning. Artificial Intelligence. 75, 2. 241–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R. Sun, (1997). Learning, action, and consciousness: a hybrid approach towards modeling consciousness. Neural Networks, special issue on consciousness. 10 (7), pp. 1317–1331.

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Sun and F. Alexandre, (eds.) (1997). Connectionist Symbolic Integration. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Sun and T. Peterson, (1995). A hybrid learning model of reactive sequential decision making. In: R. Sun and F. Alexandre, (eds.) The Working Notes of The IJCA I Workshop on Connectionist-Symbolic Integration.

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Sun and T. Peterson, (1998). Some experiments with a hybrid model for learning sequential decision making. Information Sciences. Vol. 111, pp. 83–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R. Sutton, (1990). Integrated architectures for learning, planning, and reacting based on approximating dynamic programming. Proc.of Seventh International Conference on Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann. San Mateo, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • T. Tesauro, (1992). Practical issues in temporal difference learning. Machine Learning. Vol. 8, 257–277.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • G. Towell and J. Shavlik, (1993). Extracting Refined Rules from Knowledge-Based Neural Networks, Machine Learning. 13 (1), 71–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Utgoff (1989). Incremental induction of decision trees. Machine Learning. Vol. 4, 161–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • C. Watkins, (1989). Learning with Delayed Rewards. Ph.D Thesis, Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Willingham, M. Nissen, and P. Bullemer, (1989). On the development of procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 15, 1047–1060.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Physica-Verlag Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sun, R., Peterson, T. (2001). A Subsymbolic and Symbolic Model for Learning Sequential Decision Tasks. In: Furuhashi, T., Tano, S., Jacobsen, HA. (eds) Deep Fusion of Computational and Symbolic Processing. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol 59. Physica, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-1837-6_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-1837-6_1

  • Publisher Name: Physica, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-00373-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-7908-1837-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics