scholarly journals Artifical intelligence (AI) in decision making

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrei Khrennikov

This is a short introductory review on quantum-like modeling of cognition with applications to decision making and rationality. The aim of the review is twofold: a) to present briefly the apparatus of quantum information and probability theory useful for such modeling; b) to motivate applications of this apparatus in cognitive studies and artifical intelligence, psychology, decision making, social and political sciences. We define quantum rationality as decision making that is based on quantum information processing. Quantumly and classically rational agents behaves differently. A quantum-like agent can violate the Savage Sure Thing Principle, the Aumann theorem on impossibility of agreeing to disagree.Such an agent violates the basic laws of classical probability, e.g., the law of total probability and the Bayesian probability inference. In some contexts, ``irrational behavior'' (from the viewpoint of classical theory of rationality) can be profitable, especially for agents who are overloaded by a variety of information flows. Quantumly rational agents can save a lot of information processing resources. At the same time, this sort of rationality is the basis for quantum-like socio-political engineering, e.g., social laser. This rationality plays the important role in the process of decision making not only by biosystems, but even by AI-systems. The latter equipped with quantum(-like) information processors would behave irrationally, from the classical viewpoint. As for biosystems, quantum rational behavior of AI-systems has its advantages and disadvantages. Finally, we point out that quantum-like information processing in AI-systems can be based on classical physical devices, e.g., classical digital or analog computers.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 81
Author(s):  
Maura Widyaningsih ◽  
Rio Gunadi

Expert System which is a branch of Artifical Intelligence, who learned about the estimation or decision-making ability of an expert. Methods and concepts are still needed in solving the problem of diagnosis, with engineering calculations involve computing systems., given the level of need for information and resolving cases. The application development is aimed at implementing the knowledge of an expert into a program that can help in diagnosing the symptoms of skin health problems in cats. Dempster Shafer (DS) is a method that is non monotonous in solving the problem of uncertainty due to the addition or subtraction of new facts.The system is made to diagnose the type of skin disease in cats after applying the method of DS. The system can also perform data management if there is a data change disease, symptoms, treatment solutions, as well as the rules of the disease. The diagnosis system with DS according to analysis from experts.


Geografie ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 97 (4) ◽  
pp. 253-260
Author(s):  
Jaromír Kolejka

The advanced GIS are equipped both by a database and a knowledge base. The knowledge base contains a system of rules for the purpose oriented data management and processing, which simulate the process of decision-making carried out by an expert. The principles of and experience with expert system creation are described. The expert system applications were tested in the territorial data analysis, the natural phenomena modelling, the remotely sensed data interpretation, the cartographic processes, the artifical intelligence experiments, etc.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Simen ◽  
Fuat Balcı

AbstractRahnev & Denison (R&D) argue against normative theories and in favor of a more descriptive “standard observer model” of perceptual decision making. We agree with the authors in many respects, but we argue that optimality (specifically, reward-rate maximization) has proved demonstrably useful as a hypothesis, contrary to the authors’ claims.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Danks

AbstractThe target article uses a mathematical framework derived from Bayesian decision making to demonstrate suboptimal decision making but then attributes psychological reality to the framework components. Rahnev & Denison's (R&D) positive proposal thus risks ignoring plausible psychological theories that could implement complex perceptual decision making. We must be careful not to slide from success with an analytical tool to the reality of the tool components.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.


2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
David R. Shanks ◽  
Ben R. Newell

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (01) ◽  
pp. 48
Author(s):  
David R. Shanks ◽  
Ben R. Newell

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie F. Reyna ◽  
David A. Broniatowski

Abstract Gilead et al. offer a thoughtful and much-needed treatment of abstraction. However, it fails to build on an extensive literature on abstraction, representational diversity, neurocognition, and psychopathology that provides important constraints and alternative evidence-based conceptions. We draw on conceptions in software engineering, socio-technical systems engineering, and a neurocognitive theory with abstract representations of gist at its core, fuzzy-trace theory.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document