Brenden M. Lake, Akshay K. Jagadish, Guangyuan Jiangcs.LG
Researchers must often choose between Bayesian or neural network models of behavior, two paradigms with complementary strengths and weaknesses. An ideal paradigm would facilitate testing many kinds of representations and inductive biases; Bayesian models make this easy, while neural networks do not. Similarly, an ideal paradigm would avoid over-simplifications; neural networks make this easy, while Bayesian models do not. Here, we introduce Bayesian distillation with Behavioral Tuning (BBT) as an approach to getting the best of both traditions. BBT offers a simple recipe for model building: first, a neural network is trained to mimic a Bayesian model through synthetic data, and second, the network is fine-tuned on human behavior to capture additional structure and nuance. Across four case studies in human concept learning, we find that BBT outperforms traditional approaches at predicting human behavior while also revealing psychological insights, resulting in models that can both mimic Bayesian priors and capture heuristics and biases that violate simple modeling assumptions.
Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) provide an interpretable framework by grounding predictions in human-understandable concepts, enabling semantic inspection and test-time intervention. Recent variants have improved CBMs through richer concept representations, uncertainty estimation, and dependency modeling. However, robust reasoning under unreliable concept states remains underexplored. Without such reasoning, misleading semantic evidence can propagate through the bottleneck, compromising both explanations and downstream predictions. To address this issue, we propose ReCBM, an uncertainty-gated relational reasoning framework for CBMs. ReCBM introduces semantically defined concept relations into the bottleneck and uses uncertainty to guide their refinement. By modeling co-occurrence, implication, and exclusion, ReCBM specifies how evidence is exchanged across concepts, while uncertainty modulates the contribution of each concept during this process. Experiments across diverse datasets showed that ReCBM improved concept and task recovery under missing and flipped concepts, supported uncertainty-aware intervention, and extracted compact task-relevant concept subsets without degrading downstream performance.
We revisit higher-arity atomic concept learning through the geometry of hypercubes and hyperplanes of ground instances. Our starting point is the observation that the ambient r-dimensional hypercube of ground atoms is not structurally uniform. Its logical complexity is organized by hyperplanes: every hyperplane other than the full diagonal collapses into finitely many elementary-equivalence classes, with a bound independent of the term depth, while the full diagonal is exceptional and its class count grows without bound. This asymmetry is not merely geometric. It reflects the reduction-theoretic structure of the concepts themselves. Building on a higher-dimensional framework developed in the author's earlier work, we reinterpret these results through canonical simple concepts, minimal orderings, and representative reductions. This yields a taxonomy of hyperplane behavior in higher dimensions and shows that complexity is localized rather than spread uniformly through the instance space. The paper includes a fully worked binary case, an explicit treatment of the ternary hypercube, and an unpacked account of the reduction machinery that drives the collapse. The three-dimensional case already exhibits the essential phenomenon of orthogonal families, partial diagonals, and the exceptional full diagonal. This geometric-logical perspective clarifies where complexity is concentrated in atomic concept learning and suggests a modern interpretation in terms of constrained hypothesis spaces and structured classification.
Establishing interpretable decision-making processes in long-horizon robotic manipulation is critical for enabling reliable human oversight and intervention. However, existing approaches to robotic manipulation largely treat skill selection as opaque mappings from observations to actions, offering limited transparency into how decisions are formed. In this work, we propose ConceptTree, a framework that reframes high-level manipulation skill selection as reasoning over human-interpretable concepts, representing high-level policies as a sequence of concept-level predicates over visual observations. Rather than relying on implicit latent representations, our method learns a normalized concept space grounded in visual inputs, over which a decision tree is trained to predict high-level skills. This formulation yields a transparent decision process that is both traceable and intervenable, enabling direct inspection and modification of policy behavior. We evaluate our approach on a set of real-world robotic manipulation tasks with increasing complexity. Experimental results show that ConceptTree consistently outperforms existing concept-based baselines, particularly in complex, long-horizon scenarios. Furthermore, we provide qualitative case studies showing that our model supports fine-grained intervention by modifying individual concepts, enabling targeted correction of decision errors without retraining.
Laines Schmalwasser, Jan Blunk, Niklas Penzel +2cs.CV cs.AI
Human decision-making interprets the world through high-level concepts, such as recognizing a bird by its belly color. To bridge the gap between opaque deep learning representations and human understanding, Post-Hoc Concept Bottleneck Models (post-hoc CBMs) project latent features onto interpretable concept spaces using auxiliary datasets or vision-language models. However, relying on target task accuracy as the primary measure of post-hoc CBM success obscures whether the learned concepts are semantically meaningful or merely predictive artifacts. For example, random concept projections can achieve competitive accuracy despite being semantically meaningless. In this work, we analyze the learned projections directly and identify two failure cases: First, for concept projections learned from auxiliary data, covariate shifts can lead to unfaithful concept representations for the target task. In particular, we provide an upper bound on the error introduced by this shift. Second, systematic label noise in surrogate concept labels generated by vision-language models leads to unfaithful projections. After formalizing these failure modes, we introduce novel metrics that decouple concept faithfulness from predictive accuracy. Our empirical results across real-world and synthetic benchmarks confirm that these metrics identify unfaithful behaviors that standard accuracy-based evaluation fails to detect.
Artificial intelligence systems are commonly evaluated through task performance and behavioral imitation, but such evaluations leave open whether an artificial agent can acquire, stabilize, and use new lexical meanings from grounded experience. This paper introduces Lexical Consensus, an experimental framework for studying grounded word learning over a structured perceptual substrate. Using frozen DINOv2 visual embeddings, Carroll-style nonce words, and interpretable lexical learners plus linear baselines, we test whether agents can acquire artificial labels for visual concepts, generalize them bidirectionally, and stabilize them across controlled settings. The main result is a robust perceptual-coherence gradient: native categories are easiest to learn, coherent overextensions remain learnable, mid-range disjunctive concepts degrade, and far-disjunctive concepts approach chance. A pre-registered CIFAR-100 dissociation experiment confirms that this gradient is governed by perceptual distance rather than semantic relatedness: perceptual distance predicts acquisition accuracy (partial R^2 = 0.245, p < 1e-7), while semantic distance adds no significant explanatory power (partial R^2 = 0.002, p = 0.660). Bidirectional evaluation shows that naming and retrieval are distinct: exemplar-based mechanisms outperform centroid prototypes in label-to-image retrieval, exposing a memory-fidelity dimension separate from naming accuracy. Falsification controls, homogeneous candidate-pool evaluations, and null results on representational restructuring indicate that frozen perceptual geometry both enables lexical grounding and limits what can be acquired without representational adaptation.
AI-generated image detectors achieve high accuracy on in-distribution data but often fail on unseen generators. A key obstacle to understanding this failure is the black-box nature of current detectors: they do not reveal which evidence drives their decisions. We propose ForensicConcept, a framework that extracts explicit forensic concepts from detectors and enables their transfer across backbones. Our method localizes decision-critical patches via Transformer attribution, clusters them into a compact concept codebook, and uses a concept-aligned projection to produce auditable evidence readouts. Motivated by prior studies showing that DINO representations can guide diffusion generation and exhibit concept-level correspondence with diffusion features, we introduce a generation-trace reference based on CleanDIFT diffusion features and quantify backbone-trace alignment via neighborhood-structure consistency (CKNNA). We further propose concept codebook injection to transfer diffusion-derived concepts into target backbones. Experiments on GenImage, GAN-family, and Chameleon benchmarks show consistent improvements over prior methods. We also find that CKNNA alignment predicts transfer effectiveness, providing a principled explanation for why some backbones yield more transferable forensic evidence than others.
We propose a unified mathematical framework for a geometric understanding of concept learning and neuron interpretation in sparse autoencoders (SAEs). While SAEs improve interpretability of neural networks by learning sparse feature representations, a principled definition of ''concept'' and ''learning'' remains unclear. We formalize concepts as sets of data points and cast concept learning as a set-alignment problem between human-defined and model-induced concepts. This formulation distinguishes three increasingly strong notions of learning -- detection, separation, and approximation -- and yields geometric conditions, error bounds, and capacity constraints for when concepts can be represented by individual neurons or multi-neuron units. It also provides a set-theoretic account for common SAE phenomena, including feature splitting, feature absorption, feature families, and hierarchical concepts. Finally, we connect concept learning and neuron interpretation through formal concept analysis, showing that the two directions need not agree and that their many-to-many structure can be organized by concept lattices. Experiments on synthetic data with ReLU and Top-$K$ SAEs illustrate the theory and reveal the effects of SAE size and sparsity on concept learning.