Problem-Solving Variability in Cognitive Architectures

Cognitive architectures provide a promising means to model human behavior in complex systems and problem domains. The fields of social simulation and cognitive architectures can be linked more effectively if cognitive variability can be modeled in a realistic way. In particular, if individual differences in the ways humans solve problems can be captured in computational models, the dynamic patterns of change and diversity in human systems can be explored in greater depth. Kirton's Adaption-Innovation theory provides a robust foundation for the study of creativity, problem solving, and decision making based on individual differences in cognitive level (capacity) and cognitive style (preferred approach) of problem solving. This paper examines four well-known cognitive architectures (SOAR, ACT-R, CLARION, and DUAL) in light of Adaption-Innovation theory to explore if and how cognitive style and level variables are manifested within them. This analysis leads to a proposed cognitive style continuum for cognitive architectures, as well as other possible architectural mechanisms to incorporate problem-solving variability.

[1]  Ron Sun,et al.  Incubation, insight, and creative problem solving: a unified theory and a connectionist model. , 2010, Psychological review.

[2]  A. Newell.  Unified Theories of Cognition , 1990 .

[3]  Dorothea P. Simon,et al.  Expert and Novice Performance in Solving Physics Problems , 1980, Science.

[4]  Niels Taatgen,et al.  A model of individual differences in skill acquisition in the Kanfer–Ackerman air traffic control task , 2002, Cognitive Systems Research.

[5]  Aaron Sloman,et al.  EVOLVABLE ARCHITECTURES FOR HUMAN-LIKE MINDS , 2000 .

[6]  Ron Sun,et al.  Simulating Organizational Decision-Making Using a Cognitively Realistic Agent Model , 2004, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[7]  R. Riding,et al.  Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies , 2013 .

[8]  Margaret A. Boden,et al.  Creativity and Computers , 1995 .

[9]  Melanie Mitchell,et al.  The Copycat project: a model of mental fluidity and analogy-making , 1995 .

[10]  K. Anders Ericsson,et al.  The Psychology of Problem Solving: The Acquisition of Expert Performance as Problem Solving: Construction and Modification of Mediating Mechanisms through Deliberate Practice , 2003 .

[11]  Ron Sun,et al.  The importance of cognitive architectures: an analysis based on CLARION , 2007, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[12]  James S. Albus,et al.  RCS: A cognitive architecture for intelligent multi-agent systems☆ , 2004 .

[13]  Randolph M. Jones,et al.  Automated Intelligent Pilots for Combat Flight Simulation , 1998, AI Mag..

[14]  Alberto RibesAbstract,et al.  Multi agent systems , 2019, Proceedings of the 2005 International Conference on Active Media Technology, 2005. (AMT 2005)..

[15]  Boicho N. Kokinov,et al.  The DUAL Cognitive Architecture: A Hybrid Multi-Agent Approach , 1994, ECAI.

[16]  R. Sun.  Cognition and Multi-Agent Interaction: Prolegomena To Integrating Cognitive Modeling And Social Simulation , 2005 .

[17]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The Past, Present, and Future of Cognitive Architectures , 2010, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[18]  James S. Albus,et al.  RCS: A cognitive architecture for intelligent multi-agent systems , 2005, Annu. Rev. Control..

[19]  Geraint A. Wiggins.  Searching for computational creativity , 2006, New Generation Computing.

[20]  Robert E. Wray,et al.  Cognition and Multi-Agent Interaction: Considering Soar As An Agent Architecture , 2005 .

[21]  John E. Laird,et al.  Extending the Soar Cognitive Architecture , 2008, AGI.

[22]  John S. Gero,et al.  ADAPTING EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTING FOR EXPLORATION IN CREATIVE DESIGNING , 1999 .

[23]  John S. Gero,et al.  Computational models of creative designing based on situated cognition , 2002, Creativity & Cognition.

[24]  Frank E. Ritter,et al.  Cognition and Multi-Agent Interaction: Including Human Variability in a Cognitive Architecture to Improve Team Simulation , 2005 .

[25]  Araceli Sanchis,et al.  ConsScale: A pragmatic scale for measuring the level of consciousness in artificial agents , 2010 .

[26]  Yingxu Wang,et al.  On the cognitive process of human problem solving , 2010, Cognitive Systems Research.

[27]  Teresa M. Amabile,et al.  ? + ? = creativity. , 2018, Public health nursing.

[28]  R. Sternberg,et al.  Handbook of Intellectual Styles: Preferences in Cognition, Learning, and Thinking , 2012 .

[29]  R. Sternberg,et al.  A Threefold Model of Intellectual Styles , 2005 .

[30]  Terri Gullickson.  The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. , 1995 .

[31]  Wlodzislaw Duch,et al.  Computational Creativity , 2006, The 2006 IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Network Proceedings.

[32]  S. Messick.  The nature of cognitive styles: Problems and promise in educational practice , 1984 .

[33]  M. Kirton.  Adaptors and Innovators: A Description and Measure. , 1976 .

[34]  John S. Gero,et al.  The Situated Function - Behaviour - Structure Framework , 2002, AID.

[35]  Graeme Ritchie,et al.  The transformational creativity hypothesis , 2006, New Generation Computing.

[36]  Gerhard Weiss,et al.  Multi-Agent Systems , 2013 .

[37]  G. Pask.  STYLES AND STRATEGIES OF LEARNING , 1976 .

[38]  John R. Anderson.  Problem solving and learning. , 1993 .

[39]  Mincheol Kang.  Team-Soar: a computational model for multilevel decision making , 2001, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[40]  Margaret A. Boden,et al.  Computer Models of Creativity , 2009, AI Mag..

[41]  P. Langley,et al.  An Extended Theory of Human Problem Solving , 2005 .

[42]  Bruce Edmonds,et al.  The Importance of Representing Cognitive Processes in Multi-Agent Models , 2001, ICANN.

[43]  Boicho Kokinov,et al.  A Hybrid Model of Reasoning by Analogy , 2002 .

[44]  Giulio Sandini,et al.  A Survey of Artificial Cognitive Systems: Implications for the Autonomous Development of Mental Capabilities in Computational Agents , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[45]  Pat Langley,et al.  Cognitive architectures: Research issues and challenges , 2009, Cognitive Systems Research.

[46]  Frank Pearson,et al.  The Relationship between Cognitive Style and Intelligence , 1994 .

[47]  Allen Newell,et al.  Human Problem Solving. , 1973 .

[48]  R. Riding,et al.  Cognitive Styles—an overview and integration , 1991 .

[49]  Sanghee Yeo.  Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction. , 2010, Korean journal of medical education.

[50]  A. Gruszka,et al.  Priming and Acceptance of Close and Remote Associations by Creative and Less Creative People , 2002 .

[51]  Eduardo Mizraji,et al.  A cognitive architecture that solves a problem stated by Minsky , 2001, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part B.

[52]  Philip Samuel,et al.  A cognition-based classification scheme for design techniques , 2011 .

[53]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Modeling paradigms in ACT-R , 2006 .

[54]  Magdalena D. Bugajska,et al.  An Architecture for Adaptive Algorithmic Hybrids , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics).

[55]  Fernand Gobet,et al.  Individual data analysis and Unified Theories of Cognition: A methodological proposal , 2000 .

[56]  Kathryn Jablokow,et al.  Sorting Out Creativity In Design Assessment , 2008 .