Skip to content
Projects
Groups
Snippets
Help
This project
Loading...
Sign in / Register
Toggle navigation
A
AAAI21_Emergent_language
Overview
Overview
Details
Activity
Cycle Analytics
Repository
Repository
Files
Commits
Branches
Tags
Contributors
Graph
Compare
Charts
Issues
0
Issues
0
List
Board
Labels
Milestones
Merge Requests
0
Merge Requests
0
CI / CD
CI / CD
Pipelines
Jobs
Schedules
Charts
Wiki
Wiki
Snippets
Snippets
Members
Members
Collapse sidebar
Close sidebar
Activity
Graph
Charts
Create a new issue
Jobs
Commits
Issue Boards
Open sidebar
haoyifan
AAAI21_Emergent_language
Commits
614687f3
Commit
614687f3
authored
Sep 16, 2020
by
haoyifan
Browse files
Options
Browse Files
Download
Email Patches
Plain Diff
haoyifan
parent
0de80caa
Show whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
Showing
1 changed file
with
98 additions
and
0 deletions
+98
-0
AAAI2021/tex/appendix.tex
+98
-0
No files found.
AAAI2021/tex/appendix.tex
0 → 100644
View file @
614687f3
\begin{figure}
[t]
\centering
\includegraphics
[width=0.99\columnwidth]
{
fig/Appendix
_
Figure1
_
MIS.pdf
}
\caption
{
Compositionality of symbolic language under different parameters
(
$
[
\mu
-
\sigma
,
\mu
+
\sigma
]
$
, where
$
\mu
$
is the mean value and
$
\sigma
$
is
the standard deviation).
}
\label
{
fig:exp1
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
[t]
\centering
\includegraphics
[width=0.99\columnwidth]
{
fig/Appendix
_
Figure2
_
Ratio.pdf
}
\caption
{
The ratio of high compositional language. (a)
$
MIS>
0
.
99
$
. (b)
$
MIS>
0
.
9
$
.
}
\label
{
fig:exp2
}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
[b]
\centering
\small
\caption
{
The Chi-square test between high-compositionality and agent capacity.
}
\label
{
tab:exp10
}
\begin{tabular}
{
cccc
}
\toprule
\multicolumn
{
4
}{
c
}{$
H
_
0
$
:
$
\mathit
{
MIS
}
>
0
.
90
$
is independent with
$
h
_{
\mathit
{
size
}}$}
\\
\midrule
Configuration
&
$
\chi
^
2
$
&
$
df
$
&
$
p
$
-value
\\
\midrule
$
|M
_
0
|
=
3
,|M
_
1
|
=
5
,|V|
=
10
$
&
87.20
&
10
&
$
1
.
72
\times
10
^{
-
13
}$
\\
$
|M
_
0
|
=
4
,|M
_
1
|
=
4
,|V|
=
10
$
&
71.47
&
10
&
$
1
.
70
\times
10
^{
-
10
}$
\\
\bottomrule
\multicolumn
{
4
}{
c
}{
\vspace
{
1em
}}
\\
\toprule
\multicolumn
{
4
}{
c
}{$
H
_
0
$
:
$
\mathit
{
MIS
}
>
0
.
99
$
is independent with
$
h
_{
\mathit
{
size
}}$}
\\
\midrule
Configuration
&
$
\chi
^
2
$
&
$
df
$
&
$
p
$
-value
\\
\midrule
$
|M
_
0
|
=
3
,|M
_
1
|
=
5
,|V|
=
10
$
&
34.15
&
10
&
$
6
.
39
\times
10
^{
-
4
}$
\\
$
|M
_
0
|
=
4
,|M
_
1
|
=
4
,|V|
=
10
$
&
38.26
&
10
&
$
1
.
39
\times
10
^{
-
4
}$
\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section
{
Appendix
}
\label
{
sec:exp
}
We exploit the relationship between agent capacity and the compositionality of
symbolic language that emerged in our natural referential game.
For various configuration of
vocabulary size, we fix
$
|M
_
0
|
=
|M
_
1
|
=
3
$
and train the speaker-listener agents to emerge symbolic
language when varying the agent capacities, i.e., hidden layer size
(
$
h
_{
size
}$
), from 6 to 100.
Figure~
\ref
{
fig:exp1
}
reports the experimental results. It can be observed that
the mean value of MIS decreases as the value of
$
h
_{
size
}$
increases. Taking the
configuration of vocabulary size
$
|V|
=
10
$
as an example, the mean value of MIS
is around 0.8 when
$
h
_{
size
}
\le
20
$
; MIS significantly decreases to 0.75 when
$
h
_{
size
}$
increases from 20 to 40; MIS further reduces to 0.7 when
$
h
_{
size
}$
increases from 40 to 100.
For different vocabulary sizes, the MIS shares the
similar behavior.
It is because symbols in low-compositional languages carry semantic information
about more concepts. As a result, higher capacity is required to characterize the
complex semantic information for low-compositional language to emerge.
In summary, lower agent capacity improves the possibility of
emerging high compositional symbolic language.
\subsection
{
Ratio of high compositional language.
}
We further breakdown our results to investigate the importance of agent capacity
to the compositionality of symbolic language. Figure~
\ref
{
fig:exp2
}
reports the
ratio of high compositional symbolic language in all emerged languages,
Figure~
\ref
{
fig:exp2
}
(a) and (b) for
$
\mathit
{
MIS
}
>
0
.
99
$
and
$
\mathit
{
MIS
}
>
0
.
9
$
, respectively. It
can be observed that the ratio of high compositional symbolic languages
decreases drastically with the increase of
$
h
_{
size
}$
.
Taking vocabulary size
$
|V|
=
4
$
as an example, symbolic languages with
compositionality
$
\mathit
{
MIS
}
>
0
.
99
$
take
$
>
$
10
\%
mainly over all the emerged symbolic
languages, when
$
h
_{
size
}
<
20
$
; the ratio reduces to 0
\%
$
\sim
$
5
\%
when
$
h
_{
size
}$
increases to 40; the ratio reduces around 3
\%
when
$
h
_{
size
}$
goes beyond 40.
$
\mathit
{
MIS
}
>
0
.
9
$
reports similar results.
Notably, when
$
h
_{
size
}$
is large enough (e.g.,
$
>
40
$
), high compositional
symbolic language is hard to emerge in a natural referential game, for
easy-to-emerge low compositional symbolic language is sufficient in scenarios of
referential game.
On the other side, agents are enforced to use compositionality to express
more meanings, for the constraint from low capacity.
Additionally, we also perform
$
\chi
^
2
$
test to check the statistical
significance between the high compositionality and agent
capacity. Table~
\ref
{
tab:exp10
}
reports the
$
\chi
^
2
$
test results for
$
\mathit
{
MIS
}
>
0
.
99
$
and
$
\mathit
{
MIS
}
>
0
.
9
$
, respectively. It can be observed that
for different vocabulary sizes, the p-value is always less than 0.05, which means
the high compositionality has a statistical significance related to agent
capacity.
Write
Preview
Markdown
is supported
0%
Try again
or
attach a new file
Attach a file
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment