IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/comaot/v26y2020i3d10.1007_s10588-020-09308-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Some futures for cognitive modeling and architectures: design patterns for including better interaction with the world, moderators, and improved model to data fits (and so can you)

Author

Listed:
  • Frank E. Ritter

    (Penn State/University Park)

  • Farnaz Tehranchi

    (Penn State/University Park
    Penn State/University Park)

  • Christopher L. Dancy

    (Bucknell University)

  • Sue E. Kase

    (US Army Research Laboratory)

Abstract

We note some future areas for work with cognitive models and agents that as Colbert (I am America (and so can you!), 2007) notes, “so can you”. We present three approaches as something like design patterns, so they can be applied to other architectures and tasks. These areas are: (a) Interacting directly with the screen-as-world. It is now possible for models to interact with uninstrumented interfaces both on the machine that the model is running on as well as remote machines. Improved interaction can not only support a broader range of behavior but also make the interaction more accurately model human behavior on tasks that include interaction. Just one implication is that this will force models to have more knowledge about interaction, an area that has been little modeled but essential for all tasks. (b) Providing the cognitive architecture with more representation of the body. In our example, we provide a physiological substrate to implement behavioral moderators’ effects on cognition. Cognitive architectures can now be broader in the measurements they predict and correspond to. This approach provides a more complete and theoretically appropriate way to include new aspects of behavior including stressor effects and emotions in models. And (c) using machine learning techniques, particularly genetic algorithms (GAs), to fit models to data. Because of the model complexity, this is equivalent to performing a multi-variable non-linear stochastic multiple-output regression. Doing this by hand is completely inadequate. While there is a danger of overfitting using a GA, these fits can help provide a better understanding of the model and architecture, including how the architecture changes under moderators such stress. This paper also includes some notes on model maintenance and reporting.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank E. Ritter & Farnaz Tehranchi & Christopher L. Dancy & Sue E. Kase, 2020. "Some futures for cognitive modeling and architectures: design patterns for including better interaction with the world, moderators, and improved model to data fits (and so can you)," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 278-306, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:26:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10588-020-09308-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10588-020-09308-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10588-020-09308-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10588-020-09308-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonathan H. Morgan & Geoffrey P. Morgan & Frank E. Ritter, 2010. "A preliminary model of participation for small groups," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 246-270, September.
    2. L. Richard Moore, 2011. "Cognitive model exploration and optimization: a new challenge for computational science," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 296-313, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Frank E. Ritter & William G. Kennedy & Bradley J. Best, 2013. "The best papers from BRIMS 2011: models of users and teams interacting," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 283-287, September.
    2. Christopher L. Dancy & Frank E. Ritter & Keith A. Berry & Laura C. Klein, 2015. "Using a cognitive architecture with a physiological substrate to represent effects of a psychological stressor on cognition," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 90-114, March.
    3. Changkun Zhao & Ryan Kaulakis & Jonathan H. Morgan & Jeremiah W. Hiam & Frank E. Ritter & Joesph Sanford & Geoffrey P. Morgan, 2015. "Building social networks out of cognitive blocks: factors of interest in agent-based socio-cognitive simulations," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 115-149, June.
    4. Geoffrey P. Morgan & Kathleen M. Carley, 2014. "Comparing hiring strategies in a committee with similarity biases," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 1-19, March.
    5. William G. Kennedy & Frank E. Ritter & Bradley J. Best, 2011. "Behavioral representation in modeling and simulation introduction to CMOT special issue—BRiMS 2010," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 225-228, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:26:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10588-020-09308-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.