Distinguishing rule- and exemplar-based generalization in learning
  systems
  Despite the increasing scale of datasets in machine learning, generalization
to unseen regions of the data distribution remains crucial. Such extrapolation
is by definition underdetermined and is dictated by a learner's inductive
biases. Machine learning systems often do not share the same inductive biases
as humans and, as a result, extrapolate in ways that are inconsistent with our
expectations. We investigate two distinct such inductive biases: feature-level
bias (differences in which features are more readily learned) and
exemplar-vs-rule bias (differences in how these learned features are used for
generalization). Exemplar- vs. rule-based generalization has been studied
extensively in cognitive psychology, and, in this work, we present a protocol
inspired by these experimental approaches for directly probing this trade-off
in learning systems. The measures we propose characterize changes in
extrapolation behavior when feature coverage is manipulated in a combinatorial
setting. We present empirical results across a range of models and across both
expository and real-world image and language domains. We demonstrate that
measuring the exemplar-rule trade-off while controlling for feature-level bias
provides a more complete picture of extrapolation behavior than existing
formalisms. We find that most standard neural network models have a propensity
towards exemplar-based extrapolation and discuss the implications of these
findings for research on data augmentation, fairness, and systematic
generalization.
