対称性の生物学的由来 biological origin of symmetry

対称性の生物学的由来対称性の生物学的由来Biological origin of Biological origin of

symmetrysymmetry

山﨑　由美子独立行政法人理化学研究所　象徴概念発達研究チーム

Stimulus equivalence/ Equivalence relationsStimulus equivalence/ Equivalence relations

刺激等価性刺激等価性 / / 等価関係等価関係 (Sidman) > (Sidman) > 対称性対称性

非論理的推論としての対称性非論理的推論としての対称性 / / 刺激等価性刺激等価性

APPLE

ＣＣBB

Trained

Untrained

AAAPPLE

Symm

etry

Symm

etry

SymmetrySymmetry

Transitivity

TransitivityEquivalence

Equivalence

APPLE

ＣＣ

APPLEAPPLE

ＣＣBB

Trained

Untrained

Trained

Untrained

AAAPPLE

Symm

etry

Symm

etry

SymmetrySymmetry

Transitivity

TransitivityEquivalence

Equivalence

- A relation that arises between stimuli without any perceptual similarity

- Formed through the shaping of functionally identical responses (Yamamoto, 1992)

- Stimulus substitutability (Green & Saunders, 1998)

対称性対称性SymmetrySymmetry

APPLE

Auditory stimulus Visual stimulus

ORANGE

Matching-to-sample procedure

Conditional discriminationsConditional discriminations vs.vs.

Matching-to-sample?Matching-to-sample?

Conditional discriminationsConditional discriminationsIf a, then bIf a, then b

Matching-to-sampleMatching-to-samplea R ba R b

いくつかの条件性弁別見本刺激と比較刺激の交換可能性を含めた刺激間の学習

Sample

ならば

ならば

Robust evidence in human subjectsRobust evidence in human subjects

Sidman (1971) ： Microcephaly

Sidman & Cresson (1973) ： Down’s syndrome

Sidman et al. (1982) ： 4- and 5-year children

Lipkens et al. (1993) ： symmetry in normal children up to 17-months old

Yamamoto (1994) ： severe autistic child without productive language

O'Donnell & Saunders (2003): severe mental retardation without functional language

・言語が対称性の必要条件ではない

・シンボルを使ったコミュニケーションを可能にする条件の一つ？

Authors Year Subject Equivalence?

Sidman et al. 1982 アヌビスヒヒアカゲザル

No (symmetry)

D’Amato et al. 1985 フサオマキザル

デンショバト

No (symmetry, equivalence) Transitivity

No (symmetry, equivalence, Transitivity)

Lipkens et al. 1988 デンショバト No (symmetry, equivalence)

Tobayama & Murayama

1997 シロイルカ No (symmetry, equivalence)

Transitivity

Dugdale & Lowe 1990

2000

チンパンジー No (symmetry)

Yamazaki 2001 デンショバトハシブトガラス

No (symmetry, equivalence, Transitivity)

Failures found in Non-human subjectsFailures found in Non-human subjects

なぜヒト以外の動物では対称性がほとんど示されないのか

ヒトとヒト以外の動物では対称性に限らず、認知能力一般に違いが大きい --- 基本的認知能力の差

対称性もヒト以外の動物に教えればできる --- 行動履歴の差

対称性を支える神経基盤がヒト以外の動物にはないのでは --- 神経機構の差

DiscriminationCategorization

AbstractionConcept

ReasoningNumerosity

....??

認知能力の差 ?

Modified from Herrnstein (1990)

DiscriminationDiscrimination

CategorizationCategorization

ConceptConceptnatural conceptnatural concept

abstract conceptabstract concept

Degree of abstraction

Degree of abstraction

relational conceptrelational concept

by roteby rote

by featureby feature

symmetryこの辺？

symmetryこの辺？

確かに、行動履歴は対称性成立に影響確かに、行動履歴は対称性成立に影響を及ぼしているを及ぼしている

・” Repeated training and testing” --- 訓練とテストを重ねると等価性反応が増えていく

Yamamoto & Asano (1995)・ Facilitation was observed after repeated training and testing in a chimpanzee

・” Multiple exemplar training” --- たくさん訓練した後、未訓練刺激を使って転移をテストする

Schusterman & Kastak (1993)Schusterman & Kastak (1993)・・ equivalence relations in a equivalence relations in a sea lionsea lion・・ trained with 12 pairs, tested on remaining 18 pairstrained with 12 pairs, tested on remaining 18 pairs

行動履歴の差 ?

対称性テストにさらされることが大事？

A1-B1A2-B2A3-B3A4-B4

1. BASELINE 2. SYMMETRY TRAINING

3. SYMMETRY TEST

Symmetry can be generalized in any species?Symmetry can be generalized in any species?




デンショバト

Functional equivalence:Functional equivalence:

Equivalence through sharing outcomesEquivalence through sharing outcomes

Arbitrary MTS

“if A, then B”

(Equivalence relations)

みかん Orange

りんご

Apple

A B

Repeated reversals

“A≡B”

(Functional equivalence)

みかん

Orange

りんご

Apple

GO (food)

NOGO (no food)

====


Symmetry in Set 1Symmetry in Set 1

Symmetry in Set 2Symmetry in Set 2

Functional Equivalence

Stimulus equivalence


対称性は”般化”、”転移”するような性質のものではない

Author Year Subject Equivalence?

Premack, D. 1976チンパンジー

Sarah

Symmetry(?)

Transitivity

Kojima 1984チンパンジー

Ai

No

(facilitation)

Tomonaga et al. 1991チンパンジー

ChloeSymmetry

Schusterman et al.

1993, 1998, 2001, 2002

カリフォルニアアシカRio, Rocky

ALL (sym, Trans, equiv)

Yamamoto & Asano

1995チンパンジー

Ai

No equivalence

Transitivity

Dugdale & Lowe1990

2000

チンパンジーLana, Sarah

No symmetry

言語訓練を受けたことのある被験体は？行動履歴の差 ?


・どんな種でも、ある特定の履歴を、一定時間与えればよいというものではない

・それ以上の要因があるはず ( 種特異的なバイアスの存在、特殊な神経基盤 )

“own biases of operation” (Rumbaugh, 1995)

Schusterman & Kastak, 2002

Perfect establishment of equivalence relations in California sea lions

- BA, CB, AC, CA- functional equivalence- generalized identity- exclusion

行動履歴以上とは？

対称性を示す種のバイアスの源は何か

Intimate relationship between mother and child

multi-modal matching is required in pups

Social structure

within-group communication

Social communications

between-group communication (ex. fighting)

(Schusterman et al., 2000)

A 組 B 組 C 組他者との関係

社会構造


Lessons from successful subjects:Lessons from successful subjects: 対称性が成立したヒト以外の動物間の共通対称性が成立したヒト以外の動物間の共通性性

対称性が成立したヒト以外の動物の共通項Chimpanzee (Tomonaga et al. 1991)

California sea lions (ex. Schusterman & Kastak, 1993)

Generalized identity matching

「同じ」の概念

Matching by exclusion

排他律


Generalized Identity Matching

Matching by Exclusion

- A ならば A, B ならば B

- どんな時、どんな場所にあろうと、「おなじ」とみなす

- A ならば B 　→ A でないならば B でない

- 相互排他性、一対一対応の原則

- アシカ、イルカ、チンパンジー

Sample Sample

Sample


訓練

テス

ト

““Logical” development of exclusion Logical” development of exclusion involving “illogical” inferenceinvolving “illogical” inference

p→q

条件法~p→~q

排他律q→p

対称性対偶

~q→~p

1.条件法ができる

2.対称性が成立する

3.１と２の対偶ができる ( 排他律 )

はじめに非論理的推論 ( 生物学的バイアスのかかった発達 )その後論理的推論 ( 認知操作の発達 )


1.条件法ができる

2.対称性、続いて排他律が成立する

3.１の対偶ができる

APPLE

ＣＣBB

Trained

Untrained

17 m

.

17 m

. 17 m.

17 m.

AA

APPLE

24 m.24 m.

Verbal exclusion: 27 m.Verbal exclusion: 27 m.

APPLE

ＣＣBB

Trained

Untrained

17 m

.

17 m

. 17 m.

17 m.

AA

APPLE

24 m.24 m.


APPLE

ＣＣ

APPLEAPPLE

ＣＣBB

Trained

Untrained

Trained

Untrained

17 m

.

17 m

. 17 m.

17 m.

AA

APPLE

24 m.24 m.


Lipkens et al., 1993Lipkens et al., 1993

Dickins et al., 2001

Dickins et al. (2001)

No Broca’s area, Left lateralization in DLPFC & BA10

推移性○

推移性 ×

Verbal fluency

神経機構の差 ?

A

B

C

0ms 1500 2300 Response

Feedback

Ogawa, Yamazaki, Ueno, Cheng, Iriki (2007).

Neural correlates of human specific illogicality in stimulus equivalence paradigm.

Subject :adult human

Training (feedback)

Check (>90% Correct)

fMRI (differential/ nondifferential feedback)

Fixation

Baseline

Test

Trained relations (10) Untrained (5) and trained (5) relations

A

B

C

n.s.

n.s.

** *

** *

Behavioral result

Generalization : CB symmetry?

BA (BA > AB) CB (CB > BC)

Imaging Result (p<.005, FDR corrected)

AC (AC > AB, BC) CA (CA > AB, BC)

IPA (intraparietal area, area 7) : illogically symmetrical inference is made by ignoring relational orders

MFC (medial prefrontal cortex, 8(6,9)) : finding whether the presented stimuli were trained or untrained. Category formation involved. Sensitive to conflict, discrepancy and error (Yeung 2006; Ridderinkhof 2004; Rushworth 2001).

RPFC (right prefrontal cortex, 46) : decision that presented pairs are trained or untrained, abstract category in fornto-parietal network.

Conditional discriminationsGeneralized Identity

MatchingSymmetry

Exclusion, Transitivity

Illogical + logical logical

p q Generalized Identity Matching

Symmetry

Conditional discriminationsGeneralized Identity Matching

SymmetryExclusion, Transitivity

1. p→q

条件法3. ~p→~q

排他律2. q→p

対称性3. 対偶~q→~p

Illogical logical

Symbol acquisition/Symbol manipulation

IPCParieto-frontal connection

General Cognitive manipulation

PFC

Conditional discriminationsGeneralized Identity

MatchingSymmetry, Exclusion,

Transitivity, Equivalence

Conditional discriminationsGeneralized Identity Matching

Symmetry, Exclusion, Transitivity, Equivalence

対称性の成立に関わる脳部位、神経連絡の推定

神経連絡を構築するアプローチ？

対称性の生物学的由来 biological origin of symmetry

Documents