Identifying concept libraries from language about object structure
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Our understanding of the visual world goes beyond naming objects, encompassing our ability to parse objects into meaningful parts, attributes, and relations. In this work, we leverage natural language descriptions for a diverse set of 2K procedurally generated objects to identify the parts people use and the principles leading these parts to be favored over others. We formalize our problem as search over a space of program libraries that contain different part concepts, using tools from machine translation to evaluate how well programs expressed in each library align to human language. By combining naturalistic language at scale with structured program representations, we discover a fundamental information-theoretic tradeoff governing the part concepts people name: people favor a lexicon that allows concise descriptions of each object, while also minimizing the size of the lexicon itself.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 May 2022.
Builds on
10 of 36 references.
References · 10
- 2016Google's Neural Machine Translation System: Bridging the Gap between Human and Machine Translationcited by 1,475
- 2018PartNet: A Large-scale Benchmark for Fine-grained and Hierarchical Part-level 3D Object Understandingcited by 526
- 2020Experience Grounds Languagecited by 242
- 2020DreamCoder: Growing generalizable, interpretable knowledge with wake-sleep Bayesian program learningcited by 161
- 2020Learning Physical Graph Representations from Visual Scenescited by 50
- 2021Leveraging Language to Learn Program Abstractions and Search Heuristicscited by 45
- 2019Characterizing the dynamics of learning in repeated reference gamescited by 34
- 2020Learning abstract structure for drawing by efficient motor program inductioncited by 23
- 2019When redundancy is useful: A Bayesian approach to 'overinformative' referring expressionscited by 21
- 2021Learning to communicate about shared procedural abstractionscited by 15
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 3; 2023: 1; 2024: 3; 2025: 1.
8 papers.
- 2022Top-Down Synthesis for Library Learningcited by 58
- 2022Abstract Visual Reasoning with Tangram Shapescited by 43
- 2022Using Natural Language and Program Abstractions to Instill Human Inductive Biases in Machinescited by 20
- 2023Next Steps for Human-Centered Generative AI: A Technical Perspectivecited by 13
- 2024Understanding Epistemic Language with a Language-augmented Bayesian Theory of Mindcited by 6
- 2024Finding structure in logographic writing with library learningcited by 5
- 2025Uncovering the Computational Ingredients of Human-Like Representations in LLMscited by 1
- 2024Image classification network enhancement methods based on knowledge injectioncited by 0
- 2025Uncovering the Computational Ingredients of Human-Like Representations in LLMs1 Oct 2025
- 2024Understanding Epistemic Language with a Language-augmented Bayesian Theory of Mind21 Aug 2024
- 2024Finding structure in logographic writing with library learning11 May 2024
- 2024Image classification network enhancement methods based on knowledge injection9 Jan 2024
- 2023Next Steps for Human-Centered Generative AI: A Technical Perspective27 Jun 2023
- 2022Top-Down Synthesis for Library Learning29 Nov 2022
- 2022Abstract Visual Reasoning with Tangram Shapes29 Nov 2022
- 2022Using Natural Language and Program Abstractions to Instill Human Inductive Biases in Machines23 May 2022