Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Comparing supervised learning dynamics: Deep neural networks match human data efficiency but show a generalisation lag

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2402.09303 v3 pith:F552XMQK submitted 2024-02-14 cs.CV cs.AIcs.LGq-bio.NC

Comparing supervised learning dynamics: Deep neural networks match human data efficiency but show a generalisation lag

classification cs.CV cs.AIcs.LGq-bio.NC
keywords learningdatadnnsprocessrepresentationshumanacrossbehavioral
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Recent research has seen many behavioral comparisons between humans and deep neural networks (DNNs) in the domain of image classification. Often, comparison studies focus on the end-result of the learning process by measuring and comparing the similarities in the representations of object categories once they have been formed. However, the process of how these representations emerge -- that is, the behavioral changes and intermediate stages observed during the acquisition -- is less often directly and empirically compared. Here we report a detailed investigation of the learning dynamics in human observers and various classic and state-of-the-art DNNs. We develop a constrained supervised learning environment to align learning-relevant conditions such as starting point, input modality, available input data and the feedback provided. Across the whole learning process we evaluate and compare how well learned representations can be generalized to previously unseen test data. Comparisons across the entire learning process indicate that DNNs demonstrate a level of data efficiency comparable to human learners, challenging some prevailing assumptions in the field. However, our results also reveal representational differences: while DNNs' learning is characterized by a pronounced generalisation lag, humans appear to immediately acquire generalizable representations without a preliminary phase of learning training set-specific information that is only later transferred to novel data.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Accuracy Does Not Guarantee Human-Likeness: Cross-Domain Human-Centered Benchmark in Monocular Depth Estimation

    cs.CV 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0

    Across 69 monocular depth estimators, human-likeness of error patterns peaks near human-level accuracy and declines for the most accurate models: accuracy does not guarantee human-like depth perception.