ReviewPatterns (New York, N.Y.)2023
Toward human-level concept learning: Pattern benchmarking for AI algorithms.
Review in Patterns (New York, N.Y.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Molecular life sciences in the era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution: sequencing, multi-omics and artificial intelligence.Emerging topics in life sciences · 2025Review
- Current AI technologies in cancer diagnostics and treatment.Molecular cancer · 2025Review
- Cosmogenic intelligence: The silent power.Biomaterials translational · 2025Article
- Seeing the random forest through the decision trees. Supporting learning health systems from histopathology with machine learning models: Challenges and opportunities.Journal of pathology informatics · 2024Review
- Article
- Reviewing the essential roles of remote phenotyping, GWAS and explainable AI in practical marker-assisted selection for drought-tolerant winter wheat breeding.Frontiers in plant science · 2024Review
- Interpretability Is in the Mind of the Beholder: A Causal Framework for Human-Interpretable Representation Learning.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Pathology in the artificial intelligence era: Guiding innovation and implementation to preserve human insight.Academic pathologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) today is very successful at standard pattern-recognition tasks due to the availability of large amounts of data and advances in statistical data-driven machine learning. However, there is still a large gap between AI pattern recognition and human-level concept learning. Humans can learn amazingly well even under uncertainty from just a few examples and are capable of generalizing these concepts to solve new conceptual problems. The growing interest in explainable machine intelligence requires experimental environments and diagnostic/benchmark datasets to analyze existing approaches and drive progress in pattern analysis and machine intelligence. In this paper, we provide an overview of current AI solutions for benchmarking concept learning, reasoning, and generalization; discuss the state-of-the-art of existing diagnostic/benchmark datasets (such as CLEVR, CLEVRER, CLOSURE, CURI, Bongard-LOGO, V-PROM, RAVEN, Kandinsky Patterns, CLEVR-Humans, CLEVRER-Humans, and their extension containing human language); and provide an outlook of some future research directions in this exciting research domain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.