Slashdot Mirror


Baboons Learn To Identify Words

thomst writes "Seth Borenstein of the AP reports on a story in the April 13 edition of Science (abstract here, full article paywalled) about a study of baboons at Aix-Marseille University in France that demonstrates the primates are capable of distinguishing between short, but real English words and gibberish letter combinations of similar length with an average of 75% accuracy over the course of 300,000 trials. One particularly talented subject named Dan, a 4-year-old baboon, is capable of 80% accuracy. The study's lead scientist, Jonathan Grainger, explains that a simple change in the study's methodology — allowing the subjects to work the training machine at times of their own choosing, rather than on a schedule determined by the researchers, made all the difference. When they are shown a sequence of letters, the subjects must choose between pushing a blue 'button' on a touchscreen (for a nonsense combination), or a green one (for an actual word). If they choose correctly, they get a food reward. Borenstein writes, 'The key is that these animals not only learned by trial and error which letter combinations were correct, but they also noticed which letters tend to go together to form real words, such as SH but not FX, said Grainger. So even when new words were sprung on them, they did a better job at figuring out which were real. Grainger said a pre-existing capacity in the brain may allow them to recognize patterns and objects, and perhaps that's how we humans also first learn to read.'"

23 of 111 comments (clear)

  1. Gentlemen, I think we have our new Congress by crazyjj · · Score: 5, Funny

    As long as no one teaches them the term "Corporate Whore," I think we'd be better off than with what we've got.

    Bobo no accept campaign contribution from Exxon. Bobo represent people.

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    1. Re:Gentlemen, I think we have our new Congress by crazyjj · · Score: 3, Funny

      Bobo tempted. But Bobo still no support SOPA.

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    2. Re:Gentlemen, I think we have our new Congress by jamesh · · Score: 3, Funny

      As long as no one teaches them the term "Corporate Whore," I think we'd be better off than with what we've got.

      Bobo no accept campaign contribution from Exxon. Bobo represent people.

      Exxon? That doesn't look like a real word...

  2. In wonder if it would be considered cruel... by srussia · · Score: 4, Funny

    to get those baboons to edit /.

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
    1. Re:In wonder if it would be considered cruel... by arisvega · · Score: 2

      In wonder if it would be considered cruel...

      In short, they understand language, and they know how to speek it. They just act as if they don't, because if they reveal it, then humans are going to put them to labor immediately.

      --
      The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
  3. What makes this hard to believe: by fredrated · · Score: 2

    The French were using english words?

    1. Re:What makes this hard to believe: by Hentes · · Score: 4, Funny

      They had to because french words are indistinguishable from gibberish.
      (I just realised that indistinguishable is probably responsible for a large number of monkey failures.)

  4. What does this mean for animal testing? by assertation · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If baboons can learn to recognize words is it ethical to use them in medical testing? Some retarded human beings can't do that much.

    1. Re:What does this mean for animal testing? by Empiric · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd ask it the other way around.

      If baboons can learn to recognize words, is it not ethical to use humans in medical testing?

      Then the bigger question: "Why?"

      --
      ~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
    2. Re:What does this mean for animal testing? by SydShamino · · Score: 2

      I think you should read David Brin's Uplift series. It studies the ramifications of pre-sapience vs sapience.

      Personally, I think we should be working to boost the brain power of species like baboons and dolphins. The odds of an alien sapient species arriving on our planet in my lifetime are virtually nil. If we have any chance of conversing with a different sapient species in the short term, it's with a species we uplift from our planet's native stock. And personally I'd love to be alive for the first conversation we as humans have with another species as equals.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    3. Re:What does this mean for animal testing? by tnk1 · · Score: 2

      Although they may eventually develop differently, since the only template we have for sapience is our own, so I'm not sure how much we learn about it by just applying it to other species.

      Personally, I think there's already too many people who think they are the center of the universe, we don't need egotistical animals as well.

    4. Re:What does this mean for animal testing? by assertation · · Score: 2

      I don't think intelligence counts nearly as much as the ability to suffer, but a baboon is likely to suffer far more in the wild than in a researcher's lab.

      I don't know if I would agree with that. A baboon in the wild might go hungry from time to time before it has one short, but intense episode of suffering before death: getting caught by a predator. Before that it is living free and to its instincts.

      In a research lab, a baboon would live in a cage, with its freedom of movement restricted. Its death wouldn't be quick and intense. It might be made sick and kept alive, suffering for a long time while it was being studied.

  5. interesting by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

    I wonder if this would work with other writing systems. Could they learn to tell real Chinese characters from random fake ones, for example?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  6. We already know by Lucas123 · · Score: 5, Funny

    this is going to end with Charlton Heston on a beach cursing at the Statue of Liberty.

  7. I for one... by benjfowler · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... welcome our new literate simian overlords.

  8. What I take by SJHillman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "The study's lead scientist, Jonathan Grainger, explains that a simple change in the study's methodology — allowing the subjects to work the training machine at times of their own choosing, rather than on a schedule determined by the researchers, made all the difference."

    What I take from this is that when I was in high school, I should have been able to get up at noon and go to school then if I wanted to. Guarantee I would have learned more in calculus than having it at 7:30am.

    1. Re:What I take by royallthefourth · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This approach of meeting the student's needs is central to Paulo Freire's radical pedagogy. Trying to stuff people full of facts doesn't really work very well and is frustrating to both the teacher and the student. Create a space where people learn to do things because they have a curiosity or a need for them and have the tools, time, and space to work and they will teach themselves and each other.

      I found this excerpt from a book on the topic interesting: http://www.scribd.com/doc/85646832/Education-and-Capitalism-Excerpt

  9. stop it by P-niiice · · Score: 3, Funny

    stop teaching useful skills to animals with big pointy teeth please

    teach them to laugh at youtube or something

    1. Re:stop it by marcello_dl · · Score: 2

      Come on, they are pushing colored buttons on a touchscreen. Given the amount of real work that people do on iPads, I say it's a pretty harmless activity.

      Don't teach 'em the command line, or they will pwn us in half a generation.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
  10. I'm more interested in this part: by subreality · · Score: 2

    "allowing the subjects to work the training machine at times of their own choosing, rather than on a schedule determined by the researchers, made all the difference."

    This is directly applicable to humans as well, and probably deserves more research.

  11. Recognizing patterns by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

    Grainger said a pre-existing capacity in the brain may allow them to recognize patterns and objects

    That reminds me of a column I read a while ago suggesting exactly that, and offering an evolutionary basis for it, along with an explanation for conspiracy theories. I guess this means that literacy begets superstition?

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  12. Here's what I would love to see next by Brian+Feldman · · Score: 2

    First, I would want to start with animals of even higher (subjective, to me) intelligence -- crows, african grey parrots, octopui, squid, elephants, bees, maybe domestic dogs and cats -- and then perform similar experimentation with all forms of human language: gesture (sign) language, written language and especially spoken language. I would especially like to do a double-blinded study with safely-administered psychedelics. We already know that psychedelics have a large effect on the language center of the human mind, so it would be natural for a similar effect to be present upon other animals. Most of those animals already have proven to have communication mechanisms and tool-using capabilities that are non-trivial, and so I feel they already have a similar language capability to humans. Those could be even potentiated through the use of thought-enhancing drugs.

    --
    Brian Fundakowski Feldman
  13. Identifying words does not mean what most think by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Words are made up of letters. Letters are specific shapes. So words are basically patterns of shapes. The baboons are able to identify specific patterns of shapes 75% of the time. That should come as no surprise, because in their natural environment, they must also be able to identify specific patterns of shapes to survive. Teaching them new patterns, while interesting, is just expanding on what they already do in nature.

    It does not mean, however, they can distinguish one word from another, such as dog and cat, although I am sure they can be trained to do that. Nor does it mean that they can interpret the pattern d o g or the pattern c a t to mean a dog or a cat, although, again, I'm sure they can be trained to do that. The real question, as it relates to reading, is can they assimilate what they are seeing. If not, they aren't actually reading.

    While driving a car and stopping because you see a big octagon shaped sign is not the same as reading the word "STOP" on it, even though both give the same desired outcome.