Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
102 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
59 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Convolutional Neural Networks Can (Meta-)Learn the Same-Different Relation (2503.23212v2)

Published 29 Mar 2025 in cs.CV and cs.LG

Abstract: While convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have come to match and exceed human performance in many settings, the tasks these models optimize for are largely constrained to the level of individual objects, such as classification and captioning. Humans remain vastly superior to CNNs in visual tasks involving relations, including the ability to identify two objects as same' ordifferent'. A number of studies have shown that while CNNs can be coaxed into learning the same-different relation in some settings, they tend to generalize poorly to other instances of this relation. In this work we show that the same CNN architectures that fail to generalize the same-different relation with conventional training are able to succeed when trained via meta-learning, which explicitly encourages abstraction and generalization across tasks.

Convolutional Neural Networks Can (Meta-)Learn the Same-Different Relation

The paper "Convolutional Neural Networks Can (Meta-)Learn the Same-Different Relation" investigates the capacity of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to learn abstract relational reasoning, specifically focusing on the same-different relation. Historically, CNNs have been predominantly successful in tasks requiring object classification. However, their ability to generalize and abstract relations between objects, such as determining whether two objects are the same or different, remains limited. This paper evaluates whether meta-learning techniques can enhance the ability of CNNs to generalize such relational reasoning compared to traditional training methods.

CNNs have demonstrated remarkable performance in various visual tasks, primarily driven by their architectures which mimic certain aspects of biological vision processing systems. Despite these successes, relational tasks that go beyond single-object processing continue to challenge these models. The benchmarks for this evaluation often include datasets like the Synthetic Visual Reasoning Test (SVRT), which pose various relational visual challenges to both humans and machines.

The authors present a notable shift from the conventional approach of training CNNs using direct optimization techniques, investigating instead the utility of meta-learning. Meta-learning, especially Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning (MAML), is characterized by training a model to develop a robust initialization point that can be adapted rapidly across different tasks. This is achieved by training models on a distribution of related tasks, thereby enhancing the ability of CNNs to learn the same-different relation from a generalized perspective.

The paper undertakes a methodical approach to replicate findings from previous literature, where CNNs failed to generalize same-different tasks under conventional training regimes. These generalization failures point towards an absence of necessary inductive biases in CNNs to engage with tasks that require abstract relational understanding. In their experimental setup, CNN models of varying depths were trained on multiple same-different tasks sourced and augmented from the SVRT dataset. As per the previous results, these models, when trained with standard optimization, struggled to achieve accuracy beyond a random baseline on unseen tasks, confirming their limited capability in abstract reasoning under traditional training paradigms.

Conversely, the application of meta-learning transformed the landscape of results. When models were exposed to the same data and tasks via MAML, significant improvements in performance were noted, especially as the depth of the CNNs increased. The results demonstrated that meta-learned CNNs performed with a high degree of accuracy in distinguishing same-different relations across both seen and unseen datasets, indicating an enhanced generalization capability facilitated through meta-learning. Specifically, a CNN model trained with six layers using meta-learning strategies achieved nearly perfect accuracy in various same-different tasks, including previously challenging ones.

Crucially, the authors employed a leave-one-out testing strategy to confirm the capability of meta-learned CNNs to perform out-of-distribution generalization. By training on all but one task and evaluating on the held-out task, it was shown that CNNs equipped with weights optimized through meta-learning could generalize the same-different relation to even unexposed task types. This starkly contrasts with the previously established limitations of CNNs trained through standard methodologies.

The implications of this research extend into practical and theoretical dimensions. Practically, the paper illustrates that advancing the way CNNs are optimized (meta-learning) can be as crucial to enhancing cognitive capabilities as modifying their architectures. Theoretically, this paper challenges prior conclusions about the limitations of CNNs, suggesting that neural architectures may exhibit greater abstraction abilities when equipped with proper training paradigms. Furthermore, the integration of meta-learning may represent a viable approach to circumvent traditional limitations, enabling neural networks to more closely approximate human-like relational reasoning.

This research not only redefines the potential of CNN architectures in relational reasoning tasks but also suggests avenues for future AI developments. Meta-learning's ability to boost generalization across disparate tasks could inspire broader application across other domains requiring flexible and abstract reasoning capabilities. By aligning learning processes with demands for abstraction, meta-learning may continue to provide insights into the mechanisms that could narrow the gap between artificial and human cognitive performance.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (4)
  1. Max Gupta (2 papers)
  2. Sunayana Rane (8 papers)
  3. R. Thomas McCoy (33 papers)
  4. Thomas L. Griffiths (150 papers)