VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Joseph L. Austerweil
dblp:11/3390
· DBLP profile ↗
41ranked-venue papers
5as first author
5since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-1316-4691ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 41 · 5 first-author · 5 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 33 · 2 first-author · 5 since 2021
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Rethinking Rumination: A Decision-Theoretic Approach Without Negativity Bias
Michael Payton, Mary Vitello, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 3 |
| 2023 | Video games as a path to a contextualized cognitive science, or How to move beyond 20 questions with nature
George Kachergis, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2021 | Using Machine Teaching to Investigate Human Assumptions when Teaching Reinforcement Learners
Yun-Shiuan Chuang, Xuezhou Zhang, Yuzhe Ma, Mark K. Ho, Joseph L. Austerweil, Jerry Zhu |
CogSci | 5 |
| 2021 | Cognitive Properties of Norm Representations
Bertram F. Malle, Joseph L. Austerweil, Vivienne B. Chi, Yoed N. Kenett, Emorie D. Beck, Stuti Thapa Magar, Mowafak Allaham |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2021 | Inherence bias in explanation increases with age and cognitive impairment
Jeffrey C. Zemla, Blake H. Chambers, Joseph L. Austerweil, Andrei Cimpian |
CogSci | 3 |
| 2020 | The "Fraction Sense" Emerges from a Deep Convolutional Neural Network
Yun-Shiuan Chuang, Edward Hubbard, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 3 |
| 2020 | Interactions Between Categorization and Intuitive Physics
Anantha Rao, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2019 | Evaluating Theories of Collaborative Cognition Using the Hawkes Process and a Large Naturalistic Data Set
Mohsen Afrasiabi, Mark G. Orr, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 3 |
| 2019 | Novel categories are distinct from "Not"-categories
Shi Xian Liew, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2019 | Subjective Randomness in a Non-cooperative Game
Michael Payton, Jeffrey C. Zemla, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 3 |
| 2018 | Rapid Learning in Early Attentional Processing: Bayesian Estimation of Trial-by-Trial Updating
Aaron Cochrane, Joseph L. Austerweil, Vanessa R. Simmering, C. Shawn Green |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2018 | Bayesian Generalization of Emojis
Jacqueline Erens, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2018 | Do Humans Navigate via Random Walks? Modeling Navigation in a Semantic Word Game
Mohammad Isyroqi Fathan, Eli K. Renfro, Joseph L. Austerweil, Nicole Beckage |
CogSci | 3 |
| 2018 | Effectively Learning from Pedagogical Demonstrations
Mark K. Ho, Michael L. Littman, Fiery Cushman, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 4 |
| 2018 | Predictors of L2 word learning accuracy: A big data investigation
Elise Hopman, Bill Thompson 0001, Joseph L. Austerweil, Gary Lupyan |
CogSci | 3 |
| 2018 | Possible Mechanisms of Bilingual Advantage on Creativity
Kendra Lange, Elise Hopman, Elizabeth Pettit, Anantha Rao, Nicole Beckage, Jeffrey C. Zemla, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 7 |
| 2017 | PACKER: An Exemplar Model of Category Generation
Nolan Conaway, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2017 | Teaching by Intervention: Working Backwards, Undoing Mistakes, or Correcting Mistakes?
Mark K. Ho, Michael L. Littman, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 3 |
| 2017 | Interpreting Asymmetric Perception in Speech Perception with Bayesian Inference
Jie Ren 0008, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2017 | Mental Representations and Computational Modeling of Context-Specific Human Norm Systems
Vasanth Sarathy, Matthias Scheutz, Yoed N. Kenett, Mowafak Allaham, Joseph L. Austerweil, Bertram F. Malle |
CogSci | 5 |
| 2017 | Modeling Semantic Fluency Data as Search on a Semantic Network
Jeffrey C. Zemla, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2016 | The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and Probabilistic Inference: Evidence from the Domain of Color
Emily Cibelli, Yang Xu 0023, Joseph L. Austerweil, Thomas L. Griffiths 0001, Terry Regier |
CogSci | 3 |
| 2016 | Feature-based Joint Planning and Norm Learning in Collaborative Games
Mark K. Ho, James MacGlashan, Amy Greenwald, Michael L. Littman, Elizabeth Hilliard, Carl Trimbach, Stephen Brawner, Josh Tenenbaum, Max Kleiman-Weiner, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 10 |
| 2016 | Examining Search Processes in Low and High Creative Individuals with Random Walks
Yoed N. Kenett, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2016 | Coordinate to cooperate or compete: Abstract goals and joint intentions in social interaction
Max Kleiman-Weiner, Mark K. Ho, Joseph L. Austerweil, Michael L. Littman, Josh Tenenbaum |
CogSci | 3 |
| 2016 | The construction of function representations
Brian Montambault, Christopher G. Lucas, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 3 |
| 2016 | U-INVITE: Estimating Individual Semantic Networks from Fluency Data
Jeffrey C. Zemla, Yoed N. Kenett, Kwang-Sung Jun, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 4 |
| 2016 | Showing versus doing: Teaching by demonstrationabstractPeople often learn from others' demonstrations, and classic inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) algorithms have brought us closer to realizing this capacity in machines. In contrast, teaching by demonstration has been less well studied computationally. Here, we develop a novel Bayesian model for teaching by demonstration. Stark differences arise when demonstrators are intentionally teaching a task versus simply performing a task. In two experiments, we show that human participants systematically modify their teaching behavior consistent with the predictions of our model. Further, we show that even standard IRL algorithms benefit when learning from behaviors that are intentionally pedagogical. We conclude by discussing IRL algorithms that can take advantage of intentional pedagogy. Mark K. Ho, Michael L. Littman, James MacGlashan, Fiery Cushman, Joseph L. Austerweil |
NIPS | 5 |
| 2015 | Teaching with Rewards and Punishments: Reinforcement or Communication?
Mark K. Ho, Michael L. Littman, Fiery Cushman, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 4 |
| 2015 | Learning Additive and Substitutive Features
Ting Qian, Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2014 | Testing the psychological validity of cluster construction biases
Joseph L. Austerweil |
CogSci | 1 |
| 2013 | Visual Concept Learning: Combining Machine Vision and Bayesian Generalization on Concept HierarchiesabstractLearning a visual concept from a small number of positive examples is a significant challenge for machine learning algorithms. Current methods typically fail to find the appropriate level of generalization in a concept hierarchy for a given set of visual examples. Recent work in cognitive science on Bayesian models of generalization addresses this challenge, but prior results assumed that objects were perfectly recognized. We present an algorithm for learning visual concepts directly from images, using probabilistic predictions generated by visual classifiers as the input to a Bayesian generalization model. As no existing challenge data tests this paradigm, we collect and make available a new, large-scale dataset for visual concept learning using the ImageNet hierarchy as the source of possible concepts, with human annotators to provide ground truth labels as to whether a new image is an instance of each concept using a paradigm similar to that used in experiments studying word learning in children. We compare the performance of our system to several baseline algorithms, and show a significant advantage results from combining visual classifiers with the ability to identify an appropriate level of abstraction using Bayesian generalization. Yangqing Jia, Joshua T. Abbott, Joseph L. Austerweil, Thomas L. Griffiths 0001, Trevor Darrell |
NIPS | 3 |
| 2012 | Constructing a hypothesis space from the Web for large-scale Bayesian word learning
Joshua T. Abbott, Joseph L. Austerweil, Thomas L. Griffiths 0001 |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2012 | Comparing the inductive biases of simple neural networks and Bayesian models
Thomas L. Griffiths 0001, Joseph L. Austerweil, Vincent G. Berthiaume |
CogSci | 2 |
| 2012 | Human memory search as a random walk in a semantic networkabstractThe human mind has a remarkable ability to store a vast amount of information in memory, and an even more remarkable ability to retrieve these experiences when needed. Understanding the representations and algorithms that underlie human memory search could potentially be useful in other information retrieval settings, including internet search. Psychological studies have revealed clear regularities in how people search their memory, with clusters of semantically related items tending to be retrieved together. These findings have recently been taken as evidence that human memory search is similar to animals foraging for food in patchy environments, with people making a rational decision to switch away from a cluster of related information as it becomes depleted. We demonstrate that the results that were taken as evidence for this account also emerge from a random walk on a semantic network, much like the random web surfer model used in internet search engines. This offers a simpler and more unified account of how people search their memory, postulating a single process rather than one process for exploring a cluster and one process for switching between clusters. Joshua T. Abbott, Joseph L. Austerweil, Thomas L. Griffiths 0001 |
NIPS | 2 |
| 2011 | Grow your own representations: Computational constructivism
Joseph L. Austerweil, Thomas L. Griffiths 0001, Todd M. Gureckis, Robert L. Goldstone, Kevin Robert Canini, Matt Jones 0002 |
CogSci | 1 |
| 2011 | An ideal observer model for identifying the reference frame of objectsabstractThe object people perceive in an image can depend on its orientation relative to the scene it is in (its reference frame). For example, the images of the symbols $\times$ and $+$ differ by a 45 degree rotation. Although real scenes have multiple images and reference frames, psychologists have focused on scenes with only one reference frame. We propose an ideal observer model based on nonparametric Bayesian statistics for inferring the number of reference frames in a scene and their parameters. When an ambiguous image could be assigned to two conflicting reference frames, the model predicts two factors should influence the reference frame inferred for the image: The image should be more likely to share the reference frame of the closer object ({\em proximity}) and it should be more likely to share the reference frame containing the most objects ({\em alignment}). We confirm people use both cues using a novel methodology that allows for easy testing of human reference frame inference. Joseph L. Austerweil, Abram L. Friesen, Thomas L. Griffiths 0001 |
NIPS | 1 |
| 2010 | Learning invariant features using the Transformed Indian Buffet ProcessabstractIdentifying the features of objects becomes a challenge when those features can change in their appearance. We introduce the Transformed Indian Buffet Process (tIBP), and use it to define a nonparametric Bayesian model that infers features that can transform across instantiations. We show that this model can identify features that are location invariant by modeling a previous experiment on human feature learning. However, allowing features to transform adds new kinds of ambiguity: Are two parts of an object the same feature with different transformations or two unique features? What transformations can features undergo? We present two new experiments in which we explore how people resolve these questions, showing that the tIBP model demonstrates a similar sensitivity to context to that shown by human learners when determining the invariant aspects of features. Joseph L. Austerweil, Thomas L. Griffiths 0001 |
NIPS | 1 |
| 2008 | Analyzing human feature learning as nonparametric Bayesian inferenceabstractAlmost all successful machine learning algorithms and cognitive models require powerful representations capturing the features that are relevant to a particular problem. We draw on recent work in nonparametric Bayesian statistics to define a rational model of human feature learning that forms a featural representation from raw sensory data without pre-specifying the number of features. By comparing how the human perceptual system and our rational model use distributional and category information to infer feature representations, we seek to identify some of the forces that govern the process by which people separate and combine sensory primitives to form features. Joseph L. Austerweil, Thomas L. Griffiths 0001 |
NIPS | 1 |
| 2007 | A Unified Local and Global Model for Discourse Coherence
Micha Elsner, Joseph L. Austerweil, Eugene Charniak |
HLT-NAACL | 2 |
| 2006 | Multilevel Coarse-to-Fine PCFG Parsing
Eugene Charniak, Mark Johnson 0001, Micha Elsner, Joseph L. Austerweil, David A. Ellis, Isaac Haxton, R. Shrivaths, Jeremy Moore, Michael Pozar, Theresa Vu |
HLT-NAACL | 4 |