How Can Deep Neural Networks Inform Theory in Cognitive Science?dissertationsMcGrath, Sam WhitmancreatorFeiman, RomanAdvisorPavlick, EllieReaderFrank, MichaelReaderBrown University. Department of Cognitive, Linguistic, and Psychological Sciencessponsor20252, 18 p.born digitalThesis (Sc. M.)--Brown University, 2025thesesOver the last decade, deep neural networks (DNNs) have transformed the state of the art in artificial intelligence. In domains such as language production and reasoning, long considered uniquely human abilities, contemporary models have proven capable of strikingly human-like performance. However, in contrast to classical symbolic models, neural networks can be inscrutable even to their designers, making it unclear what significance, if any, they have for theories of human cognition. Two extreme reactions are common. Neural network enthusiasts argue that, because the inner workings of DNNs do not seem to resemble any of the traditional constructs of psychological or linguistic theory, their success renders these theories obsolete and motivates a radical paradigm shift. Neural network skeptics instead take this inability to interpret DNNs in psychological terms to mean that their success is irrelevant to psychological science. In this article, we review recent work that suggests that the internal mechanisms of DNNs can, in fact, be interpreted in the functional terms characteristic of psychological explanations. We argue that this undermines the shared assumption of both extremes and opens the door for DNNs to inform theories of cognition and its development.Natural language processing (Computer science)PhilosophyCognitive scienceArtificial intelligenceLarge Language Modeldeep neural networkConnectionismEnglishRPB20250707