A Quantum Probability Explanation in Fock Space for Borderline Contradictions

The construction of a consistent theory for structuring and representing how concepts combine and interact is one of the main challenges for the scholars involved in cognitive studies. All traditional approaches are still facing serious hindrances when dealing with combinations of concepts and concept vagueness. One of the main consequences of these difficulties is the existence of borderline cases which is hardly explainable from the point of view of classical (fuzzy set) logic and probability theory. Resting on a quantum-theoretic approach which successfully models conjunctions and disjuncions of two concepts, we propound a quantum probability model in Fock space which accords with the experimental data collected by Alxatib and Pelletier (2011) on borderline contradictions. Our model allows one to explain the occurrence of the latter contradictions in terms of genuine quantum effects, such as contextuality, superposition, interference and emergence. In particular, we claim that it is the specific mechanism of `emergence of a new concept' that is responsible of these deviations from classical logical thinking in the cognitive studies on human thought. This result seems to be compatible with a recent interesting application of quantum probabilistic modeling in the study of borderline vagueness (Blutner, Pothos & Bruza, 2012), and analogies and differences with it are sketched here.

[1]  J. Hampton.  Overextension of Conjunctive Concepts: Evidence for a Unitary Model of Concept Typicality and Class Inclusion , 1988 .

[2]  Daniel N. Osherson,et al.  On the psychology of vague predicates , 1999 .

[3]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum Structure in Cognition , 2008, 0805.3850.

[4]  H. Kamp,et al.  Prototype theory and compositionality , 1995, Cognition.

[5]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  On typicality and vagueness , 1997, Cognition.

[6]  Lance J. Rips,et al.  The Current Status of Research on Concept Combination , 1995 .

[7]  Jerome R. Busemeyer,et al.  An Exploration of Type Indeterminacy in Strategic Decision-Making , 2009, QI.

[8]  Peter Bruza,et al.  Extracting Spooky-Activation-at-a-Distance from Considerations of Entanglement , 2009, QI.

[9]  Peter Bruza,et al.  Entangling words and meaning , 2008 .

[10]  Dominic Widdows,et al.  Geometry and Meaning , 2004, Computational Linguistics.

[11]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Contextualizing concepts using a mathematical generalization of the quantum formalism , 2002, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[12]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  On the adequacy of prototype theory as a theory of concepts , 1981, Cognition.

[13]  Dirk Aerts,et al.  A possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mechanics , 1986 .

[14]  I. Pitowsky.  Quantum Probability ― Quantum Logic , 1989 .

[15]  J. Fodor,et al.  Concepts: a potboiler , 1994, Cognition.

[16]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Quantum aspects of semantic analysis and symbolic artificial intelligence , 2003, quant-ph/0309022.

[17]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The Violation of Bell Inequalities in the Macroworld , 2000, quant-ph/0007044.

[18]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Foundations of Quantum Physics: A General Realistic and Operational Approach , 2001, quant-ph/0105109.

[19]  James T. Townsend,et al.  Quantum dynamics of human decision-making , 2006 .

[20]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Representation in Memory. , 1983 .

[21]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Applications of Quantum Statistics in Psychological Studies of Decision Processes , 1995 .

[22]  Jean Piaget,et al.  Le langage et la pensée chez l'enfant , 1923 .

[23]  Rick Nouwen,et al.  Vagueness in Communication , 2009, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[24]  J. Hampton,et al.  Conceptual combination: Conjunction and negation of natural concepts , 1997, Memory & cognition.

[25]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  A Quantum Structure Description of the Liar Paradox , 1999 .

[26]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum Structure in Cognition: Why and How Concepts Are Entangled , 2011, QI.

[27]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  A theory of concepts and their combinations I: The structure of the sets of contexts and properties , 2005 .

[28]  Ophir Frieder,et al.  Repeatable evaluation of search services in dynamic environments , 2007, TOIS.

[29]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  Ubiquitous Quantum Structure , 2010 .

[30]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum structure and human thought. , 2013, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[31]  Shmuel Zamir,et al.  Type Indeterminacy: A Model for the KT(Kahneman-Tversky)-Man , 2006, physics/0604166.

[32]  Uli Sauerland.  Vagueness in Language: The Case Against Fuzzy Logic Revisited , 2010 .

[33]  Massimo Melucci,et al.  A basis for information retrieval in context , 2008, TOIS.

[34]  L. Komatsu.  Recent views of conceptual structure , 1992 .

[35]  Roland Potthast,et al.  Language processing with dynamic fields , 2008, Cognitive Neurodynamics.

[36]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Classical Logical Versus Quantum Conceptual Thought: Examples in Economics, Decision Theory and Concept Theory , 2008, QI.

[37]  David Ripley,et al.  Contradictions at the Borders , 2009, ViC.

[38]  J. Hampton,et al.  Disjunction of natural concepts , 1988, Memory & cognition.

[39]  C. J. van Rijsbergen,et al.  The geometry of information retrieval , 2004 .

[40]  M..  FROM LEARNING THEORY TO CONNECTIONIST THEORY : Essays in Honor of , 2005 .

[41]  Jerome R. Busemeyer,et al.  Quantum Models of Cognition and Decision , 2012 .

[42]  Harald Atmanspacher,et al.  The Potential of Quantum Probability for Modeling Cognitive Processes , 2011, CogSci.

[43]  William James.  Some problems of philosophy , 1911 .

[45]  Harald Atmanspacher,et al.  The Potential of Using Quantum Theory to Build Models of Cognition , 2013, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[46]  R. Nosofsky.  Exemplar-Based Accounts of Relations Between Classification, Recognition, and Typicality , 1988 .

[47]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Experimental Evidence for Quantum Structure in Cognition , 2008, QI.

[48]  Riccardo Franco,et al.  The conjunction fallacy and interference effects , 2007, 0708.3948.

[49]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  A Theory of Concepts and Their Combinations II: A Hilbert Space Representation , 2004 .

[50]  Jennifer S Trueblood,et al.  A quantum theoretical explanation for probability judgment errors. , 2011, Psychological review.

[51]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum Particles as Conceptual Entities: A Possible Explanatory Framework for Quantum Theory , 2009, 1004.2530.

[52]  R. Nosofsky.  Exemplars, prototypes, and similarity rules. , 1992 .

[53]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The Guppy Effect as Interference , 2012, QI.

[54]  Sam Alxatib,et al.  On the Psychology of Truth-Gaps , 2009, ViC.

[55]  S. Sloman.  The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. , 1996 .

[56]  J. Bruner.  Acts of meaning , 1990 .

[57]  Eleanor Rosch,et al.  Principles of Categorization , 1978 .

[58]  J. Busemeyer,et al.  A quantum probability explanation for violations of ‘rational’ decision theory , 2009, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[59]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  Gradedness and conceptual combination , 1982, Cognition.

[60]  Emmanuel M. Pothos,et al.  A Quantum Probability Perspective on Borderline Vagueness , 2013, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[61]  Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky,et al.  Type indeterminacy - A Model of the KT(Khaneman Tversky)- Man , 2009 .

[62]  L. A. Zadeh,et al.  A note on prototype theory and fuzzy sets , 1982, Cognition.

[63]  K. Sailer.  Quantum mechanics, 4th Ed. Alastair I.M. Rae , 2003 .

[64]  D. Medin,et al.  The role of theories in conceptual coherence. , 1985, Psychological review.

[65]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Concepts and Their Dynamics: A Quantum-Theoretic Modeling of Human Thought , 2012, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[66]  A. Messiah.  Quantum Mechanics , 1961 .