The Prepared Mind: the Role of Representational Change in Chance Discovery

  • Eric Dietrich
  • Arthur B. Markman
  • C. Hunt Stilwell
  • Michael Winkley
Part of the Advanced Information Processing book series (AIP)

Summary

Analogical reminding in humans and machines is a great source for chance discoveries because analogical reminding can produce representational change and thereby produce insights. Here, we present a new kind of representational change associated with analogical reminding called packing. We derived the algorithm in part from human data we have on packing. Here, we explain packing and its role in analogy making, and then present a computer model of packing in a micro-domain. We conclude that packing is likely to be used in human chance discoveries, and is needed if our machines are to make their own chance discoveries.

Chance favors only the prepared mind.” — Louis Pasteur

Keywords

Sugar Rubber Posit Hunt Arena 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 15.1
    Dietrich E (2000) “Analogy and conceptual change, or you can’t step into the same mind twice. In E. Dietrich and A. Markman (eds.), Cognitive Dynamics: Conceptual and representational change in humans and machines, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 265–294Google Scholar
  2. 15.2
    Falkenhainer B, Forbus K, Gentner D (1989) The structure-mapping engine: Algorithm and examples, Artificial Intelligence, 41 (1): 1–63CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 15.3
    Forbus K, Gentner D, Law K (1995) MAC/FAC: A model of similarity-based retrieval. Cognitive Science, 19: 141–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 15.4
    Gentner D, Brem S, Ferguson R, Markman A, Levidow B, Wolff P, Forbus K (1997) Analogical reasoning and conceptual change: A case study of Johannes Kepler. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6 (1): 3–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 15.5
    Gentner D (1983) Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy, Cognitive Science 7: 155–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 15.6
    Gentner D (1989) The mechanisms of analogical learning, In S. Vosniadou and A. Ortony (eds.) Similarity and analogical reasoning, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 199–241.Google Scholar
  7. 15.7
    Gentner D, Markman AB (1997) Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52 (1): 45–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 15.8
    Gentner D, Wolff P (2000) Metaphor and knowledge change,“ In Dietrich E, Markman A (eds), Cognitive Dynamics: Conceptual and representational change in humans and machines, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 295–342Google Scholar
  9. 15.9
    Hummel JE, Holyoak KJ (1997) Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical access and mapping. Psychological Review, 104 (3): 427–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 15.10
    Kotovsky L, Gentner D(1996) Comparison and categorization in the development of relational similarity, Child Development, 67: 2797–2822.Google Scholar
  11. 15.11
    Markman AB (1997) Constraints on analogical inference. Cognitive Science, 21 (4): 373–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 15.12
    Markman AB (1999) Knowledge Representation. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJGoogle Scholar
  13. 15.13
    Markman AB, Gentner D (1993) Structural alignment during similarity Comparisons. Memory and Cognition, 24 (2): 235–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 15.14
    Markman AB, Gentner D (1996) Commonalities and differences, Memory and Cognition, 24: 235–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.15
    Palmer SE (1978) Fundamental aspects of cognitive representation. In Rosch E, Lloyd BB (eds) Cognition and Categorization, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 259–302Google Scholar
  16. 15.16
    Poincare H (1908/1952) Science and Method,Dover Publications, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. 15.17
    Stilwell CH, Markman AB, Dietrich E (2001). The Fate of Irrelevant Information in Analogy, Unpublished Ms.Google Scholar
  18. 15.18
    Thagard P, Holyoak KJ, Nelson G, Gochfeld D (1990) Analogical retrieval by constraint satisfaction. Artificial Intelligence, 46, 259–310MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 15.19
    Wiser M, Carey S (1983) When heat and temperature were one. In Gentner D, Stevens AL (eds) Mental Models (pp. 267–298 ), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric Dietrich
    • 1
  • Arthur B. Markman
    • 2
  • C. Hunt Stilwell
    • 2
  • Michael Winkley
    • 1
  1. 1.Philosophy DepartmentBinghamton UniversityBinghamtonUSA
  2. 2.Psychology DepartmentUniversity of TexasAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations