Simulating Meaning Negotiation Using Observational Language Games

  • Tiina Lindh-Knuutila
  • Timo Honkela
  • Krista Lagus
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4211)


In this article, we study the emergence of associations between words and concepts using the self-organizing map. In particular, we explore the meaning negotiations among communicating agents. The self-organizing map is used as a model of an agent’s conceptual memory. The concepts are not explicitly given but they are learned by the agent in an unsupervised manner. Concepts are viewed as areas formed in a self-organizing map based on unsupervised learning. The language acquisition process is modeled in a population of simulated agents by using a series of language games, specifically observational games. The results of the simulation experiments verify that the agents learn to communicate successfully and a shared lexicon emerges.


Conceptual Space Language Game Search Radius Color Picture Lexicon Size 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Gärdenfors, P.: Conceptual spaces: The Geometry of Thought. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kohonen, T.: Self-organized formation of topologically correct feature maps. Biological Cybernetics 43, 59–69 (1982)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kohonen, T.: Self-Organizing Maps. Series in Information Sciences. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Honkela, T.: Neural nets that discuss: a general model of communication based on self-organizing maps. In: Gielen, S., Kappen, B. (eds.) Proceedings of ICANN 1993, International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks, Amsterdam, pp. 408–411. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg (1993)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Steels, L.: Perceptually grounded meaning creation. In: Tokoro, M. (ed.) ICMAS 1996. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1996)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vogt, P., Coumans, H.: Investigating social interaction strategies for bootstrapping lexicon development. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 6(1) (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wittgenstein, L.: Philosophical Investigations. Macmillan, Basingstoke (1963)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vogt, P.: Lexicon Grounding in Mobile Robots. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smith, A.D.M.: Establishing communication systems without explicit meaning transmission. In: Kelemen, J., Sosík, P. (eds.) ECAL 2001. LNCS, vol. 2159, p. 381. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schyns, P.: A modular neural network model of concept acquisition. Cognitive Science 15, 461–508 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cangelosi, A., Parisi, D.: The emergence of a ‘language’ in a population of evolving neural networks. Connection Science 10(2), 83–97 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grim, P., Kokalis, T., Tafti, A., Kilb, N.: Evolution of communication with a spatialized genetic algorithm. Evolution of Communication 3(2) (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Oudeyer, P.Y.: The self-organization of combinatoriality and phonotactics in vocalization systems. Connection Science 17(3-4), 325–341 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wermter, S., Elshaw, M.: Learning robot actions based on self-organising language memory. Neural Networks 16, 691–699 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Raitio, J., Vigário, R., Särelä, J., Honkela, T.: Assessing similarity of emergent representations based on unsupervised learning. In: Proc. of International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN 2004), Budapest, Hungary, pp. 597–602 (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Steels, L.: Emergent adaptive lexicons. In: Maes, P. (ed.) SAB 1996. MIT Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vogt, P.: The emergence of compositional structures in perceptually grounded language games. Artificial Intelligence 167(1-2), 206–242 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Jong, E.: Autonomous Formation of Concepts and Communication. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Steels, L., Vogt, P.: Grounding adaptive language games in robotic agents. In: Husbands, C., Harvey, I. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourth European conference on Artificial Life. MIT Press, Cambridge (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pöllä, M., Lindh-Knuutila, T., Honkela, T.: Self-refreshing SOM as a semantic memory model. In: Proceedings of AKRR 2005, International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Adaptive Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Espoo, Finland, pp. 171–174 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kirby, S.: Spontaneous evolution of linguistic structure: an iterated learning model of the emergence of regularity and irregularity. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 5(2), 102–110 (2001)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tiina Lindh-Knuutila
    • 1
  • Timo Honkela
    • 1
  • Krista Lagus
    • 1
  1. 1.Adaptive Informatics Research CentreHelsinki University of Technology, TKKFinland

Personalised recommendations