Humans predict liquid dynamics using probabilistic simulation

Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2015

Volumn , Issue , 2015, Pages 172-177

  Bates, Christopher J ^a   Yildirim, Ilker ^a   Tenenbaum, Joshua B ^a   Battaglia, Peter W ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FORECASTING;

COGNITIVE MECHANISMS; COMPUTATIONAL COGNITIVE MODELING; DYNAMICAL CHARACTERISTICS; LIQUID DYNAMICS; LIQUID MATERIALS; MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS; MODEL-BASED OPC; PROBABILISTIC SIMULATION; PSYCHOPHYSICAL EXPERIMENTS; SOLID OBSTACLES;

LIQUIDS;

EID: 85139487925     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Battaglia, P. W., Hamrick, J. B., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2013). Simulation as an engine of physical scene understanding. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(45), 18327-18332.
2. Davis, E. (2008). Pouring liquids: A study in commonsense physical reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 172, 1540-1578.
3. Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1994). An introduction to the bootstrap. CRC press.
4. Forbus, K. D. (2011). Qualitative modeling. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2(4), 374-391.
5. Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1997). Qualitative mental models: Simulations or memories. In Proceedings of the eleventh international workshop on qualitative reasoning (pp. 3-6).
6. Gardin, F., & Meltzer, B. (1989). Analogical representations of naive physics. Artificial Intelligence, 38(2), 139-159.
7. Gerstenberg, T., Goodman, N., Lagnado, D. A., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2012). Noisy newtons: Unifying process and dependency accounts of causal attribution. In In proceedings of the 34th.
8. Gigerenzer, G., Hertwig, R., & Pachur, T. (2011). Heuristics: The foundations of adaptive behavior. Oxford University Press, Inc.
9. Hegarty, M. (2004). Mechanical reasoning by mental simulation. Trends in cognitive sciences, 8(6), 280-285.
10. Hespos, S. J., Ferry, A. L., & Rips, L. J. (2009). Five-month-old infants have different expectations for solids and liquids. Psychological Science, 20(5), 603-611.
11. Jia, Y., Shelhamer, E., Donahue, J., Karayev, S., Long, J., Girshick, R., ... Darrell, T. (2014). Caffe: Convolutional architecture for fast feature embedding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1408.5093.
12. Kawabe, T., Maruya, K., Fleming, R. W., & Nishida, S. (2014). Seeing liquids from visual motion. Vision research.
13. Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., & Hinton, G. E. (2012). Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 1097-1105).
14. Marcus, G. F., & Davis, E. (2013). How robust are probabilistic models of higher-level cognition? Psychological science, 24(12), 2351-2360.
15. McClelland, J. L. (2013). Integrating probabilistic models of perception and interactive neural networks: a historical and tutorial review. Frontiers in psychology, 4.
16. McCloskey, M., & Kohl, D. (1983). Naive physics: the curvilinear impetus principle and its role in interactions with moving objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9(1), 146.
17. Michalski, V., Memisevic, R., & Konda, K. (2014). Modeling deep temporal dependencies with recurrent grammar cells. In Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 1925-1933).
18. Monaghan, J. J. (2005). Smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Reports on progress in physics, 68(8), 1703.
19. Sanborn, A. N. (2014). Testing bayesian and heuristic predictions of mass judgments of colliding objects. Frontiers in psychology, 5.
20. Sanborn, A. N., Mansinghka, V. K., & Griffiths, T. L. (2013). Reconciling intuitive physics and newtonian mechanics for colliding objects. Psychological review, 120(2), 411.
21. Schubotz, R. I. (2007). Prediction of external events with our motor system: towards a new framework. Trends in cognitive sciences, 11(5), 211-218.
22. Smith, K., Battaglia, P., & Vul, E. (2013). Consistent physics underlying ballistic motion prediction. In Proceedings of the 35th conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 3426-3431).
23. Smith, K. A., & Vul, E. (2013). Sources of uncertainty in intuitive physics. Topics in cognitive science, 5(1), 185-199.