Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rationality, Cognitive Bias, and Artificial Intelligence: A Structural Perspective on Quantum Cognitive Science

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics. Cognition and Design (HCII 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 12187))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Human beings are not completely rational; there is some irrationality, as well as bounded rationality, involved in the nature of human thinking. It has been shown through recent advances in quantum cognitive science that certain aspects of human irrationality, such as cognitive biases in the Kahneman-Tversky tradition, can be explained via mathematical models borrowed from quantum physics. It has also been shown in quantum cognitive science that human rationality exhibits a special sort of non-classical phenomenon as observed in quantum physics as well, namely the phenomenon of contextuality, which extends the notion of non-locality, what Einstein called “spooky action at a distance”. In the present paper we elucidate and articulate the nature of human rationality and irrationality as observed in cognitive bias experiments and cognitive contextuality experiments. And we address the question whether non-human agents, such as animals and robots, can exhibit the same sort of cognitive biases and cognitive contextuality. Technically, we shed new light on these (quantum) cognitive experiments from the viewpoint of logic and category theory. We argue, inter alia, that the logic of cognition is substructural or monoidal, rather than Cartesian (which encompasses classical, intuitionistic, etc.), just as the logic of quantum mechanics and information is substructural or monoidal. The logic of reality is thus intertwined with the logic of cognition; the logical link between physical reality and the conscious mind would possibly allow us to go beyond the Cartesian dualism separating matter and mind as intrinsically different entities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Abramsky, S., Brandenburger, A.: The sheaf-theoretic structure of non-locality and contextuality. New J. Phys. 13, 113036 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Abramsky, S., Coecke, B.: A categorical semantics of quantum protocols. In: Proceedings of the 19th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pp. 415–425 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Abramsky, S., Hardy, L.: Logical bell inequalities. Phys. Rev. A 85, 062114 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Busemeyer, J., Bruza, P.: Quantum Models of Cognition and Decision. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Caliskan, A., et al.: Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases. Science 356, 183–186 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cervantes, V., Dzhafarov, E.: Snow queen is evil and beautiful: experimental evidence for probabilistic contextuality in human choices. Decision 5, 193–204 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chalmers, D.: The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1996)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Coecke, B., Sadrzadeh, M., Clark, S.: Mathematical foundations for a compositional distributional model of meaning. Linguist. Anal. 36, 345–384 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dzhafarov, E., et al.: On contextuality in behavioural data. Philos. Trans. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 374, 20150234 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Galatos, N., et al.: Residuated Lattices: An Algebraic Glimpse at Substructural Logics. Elsevier Science, San Diego (2007)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Grefenstette, E., Sadrzadeh, M.: Experimental support for a categorical compositional distributional model of meaning. In: Proceedings of EMNLP 2011, pp. 1394–1404 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hansen, A.: Outsmart Your Instincts. Forness Press, Minneapolis (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Heunen, C., Vicary, J.: Categories for Quantum Theory. OUP, Oxford (2019)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Subjective probability: a judgment of representativeness. Cogn. Psychol. 3, 430–454 (1972)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Maruyama, Y.: AI, quantum information, and external semantic realism: Searle’s observer-relativity and chinese room, revisited. In: Müller, V.C. (ed.) Fundamental Issues of Artificial Intelligence. SL, vol. 376, pp. 115–126. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26485-1_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Maruyama, Y.: Quantum pancomputationalism and statistical data science: from symbolic to statistical AI, and to quantum AI. In: Müller, V.C. (ed.) PT-AI 2017. SAPERE, vol. 44, pp. 207–211. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96448-5_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Maruyama, Y.: The frame problem, Gödelian incompleteness, and the Lucas-Penrose argument: a structural analysis of arguments about limits of AI, and its physical and metaphysical consequences. In: Müller, V.C. (ed.) PT-AI 2017. SAPERE, vol. 44, pp. 194–206. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96448-5_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Maruyama, Y.: Compositionality and contextuality: the symbolic and statistical theories of meaning. In: Bella, G., Bouquet, P. (eds.) CONTEXT 2019. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11939, pp. 161–174. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34974-5_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Maruyama, Y.: Contextuality across the sciences: Bell-type theorems in physics and cognitive science. In: Bella, G., Bouquet, P. (eds.) CONTEXT 2019. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11939, pp. 147–160. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34974-5_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Medin, D., Altom, M., Murphy, T.: Given versus induced category representations: Use of prototype and exemplar information in classification. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cognit. 10, 333–352 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Moore, D.: Measuring new types of question-order effects: additive and subtractive. Public Opin. Q. 66, 80–91 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Pothos, E., Busemeyer, J.: A quantum probability explanation for violations of ‘rational’ decision theory. Proc. Biol Sci. 276(1665), 2171–2178 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sen, A.: Rational fools: a critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. Philos. Public Aff. 6, 317–344 (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Simon, H.: Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 2, 125–134 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Judgments of and by representativeness. In: Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Tversky, A., Shafir, E.: Choice under conflict: the dynamics of deferred decision. Psychol. Sci. 3, 358–361 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Wang, Z., Solloway, T., Shiffrin, R., Busemeyer, J.: Context effects produced by question orders reveal quantum nature of human judgments. Proc. Nac. Acad. Sci. 111, 9431–9436 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Watanabe, E., et al.: Illusory motion reproduced by deep neural networks trained for prediction. Front. Psychol. 9, 345 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank his colleagues (in the JST PRESTO project and others) for the substantial and pleasant discussions that have inspired the present work in many ways. The author hereby acknowledges that the present work was financially supported by JST PRESTO (grant code: JPMJPR17G9) and JSPS Kakenhi (grant code: 17K14231).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research School of Computer Science, College of Engineering and Computer Science, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

    Yoshihiro Maruyama

Authors
  1. Yoshihiro Maruyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoshihiro Maruyama .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Coventry University, Coventry, UK

    Don Harris

  2. Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK

    Wen-Chin Li

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Maruyama, Y. (2020). Rationality, Cognitive Bias, and Artificial Intelligence: A Structural Perspective on Quantum Cognitive Science. In: Harris, D., Li, WC. (eds) Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics. Cognition and Design. HCII 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12187. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49183-3_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49183-3_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-49182-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-49183-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation