A theory of concepts and their combinations I: The structure of the sets of contexts and properties

Purpose – To elaborate a theory for modeling concepts that incorporates how a context influences the typicality of a single exemplar and the applicability of a single property of a concept. To investigate the structure of the sets of contexts and properties. Design/methodology/approach – The effect of context on the typicality of an exemplar and the applicability of a property is accounted for by introducing the notion of “state of a concept”, and making use of the state‐context‐property formalism (SCOP), a generalization of the quantum formalism, whose basic notions are states, contexts and properties. Findings – The paper proves that the set of context and the set of properties of a concept is a complete orthocomplemented lattice, i.e. a set with a partial order relation, such that for each subset there exists a greatest lower bound and a least upper bound, and such that for each element there exists an orthocomplement. This structure describes the “and”, “or”, and “not”, respectively for contexts and properties. It shows that the context lattice as well as the property lattice are non‐classical, i.e. quantum‐like, lattices. Originality/value – Although the effect of context on concepts is widely acknowledged, formal mathematical structures of theories that incorporate this effect have not been successful. The study of this formal structure is a preparation for the elaboration of a theory of concepts that allows the description of the combination of concepts.

[1]  E. Rosch ON THE INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF PERCEPTUAL AND SEMANTIC CATEGORIES1 , 1973 .

[2]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  State Property Systems and Closure Spaces: Extracting the Classical and Nonclassical Parts ∗ , 2002 .

[3]  Diederik Aerts Quantum Mechanics: Structures, Axioms and Paradoxes , 1999 .

[4]  D. I. Blokhintsev Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik , 1936, Nature.

[5]  D. J. Foulis,et al.  A Mathematical Setting for Inductive Reasoning , 1976 .

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

[7]  Diederik Aerts BEING AND CHANGE: FOUNDATIONS OF A REALISTIC OPERATIONAL FORMALISM , 2002 .

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

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

[10]  C. Hooker,et al.  Foundations of Probability Theory, Statistical Inference, and Statistical Theories of Science , 1976 .

[11]  C. Piron Recent developments in quantum mechanics , 1988 .

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

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

[14]  C. Piron,et al.  On the Foundations of Quantum Physics , 1976 .

[15]  E. Rosch,et al.  Cognition and Categorization , 1980 .

[16]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Connectedness Applied to Closure Spaces and State Property Systems , 2002 .

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

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

[19]  Mark W. Altom,et al.  Given versus induced category representations: use of prototype and exemplar information in classification. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[20]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Contextualizing Concepts , 2002, FLAIRS.

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

[22]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  Categories and concepts , 1984 .

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

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

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

[26]  E. Rosch,et al.  Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[27]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Classicality and connectedness for state property systems and closure spaces , 2004 .

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

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

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

[31]  C. Piron,et al.  Mécanique quantique : bases et applications , 1998 .

[32]  Ernest Lepore,et al.  The pet fish and the red herring: why concepts aren't prototypes , 1996 .

[33]  J. Hampton Conceptual combination , 2003 .

[34]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  Combining exemplar-based category representations and connectionist learning rules. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[35]  R D Thomas,et al.  Learning correlations in categorization tasks using large, ill-defined categories. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[36]  E. Rosch Cognitive Representations of Semantic Categories. , 1975 .

[37]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum structures in macroscopic reality , 1993 .

[38]  Eric Minch,et al.  Interview with Heinz von Foerster , 1995 .

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

[40]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The Generalised Liar Paradox: A Quantum Model and Interpretation , 2004 .

[41]  L. Gabora,et al.  Cognitive Mechanisms Underlying the Origin and Evolution of Culture , 2001 .

[42]  E. Heit,et al.  The instantiation principle in natural categories. , 1996, Memory.

[43]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  State Property Systems and Closure Spaces: A Study of Categorical Equivalence , 1999 .

[44]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Mechanistic classical laboratory situation with a quantum logic structure , 1992 .

[45]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  Rule-plus-exception model of classification learning. , 1994, Psychological review.

[46]  S. Peters,et al.  Word Vectors and Quantum Logic Experiments with negation and disjunction , 2003 .

[47]  M. Halliday New trends in conceptual representation: Challenges to Piaget's theory , 1985 .

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

[49]  F. Moore Cognitive development and the acquisition of language , 1973 .

[50]  R. Morrow,et al.  Foundations of Quantum Mechanics , 1968 .

[51]  Heinz von Foerster,et al.  On Constructing a Reality , 2015, Environmental Design Research.

[52]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Concepts and Categorization , 2003 .

[53]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Example of a macroscopical classical situation that violates Bell inequalities , 1982 .

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

[55]  A. Riegler,et al.  Understanding Representation in the Cognitive Sciences , 1999, Springer US.

[56]  Sharon Lee Armstrong,et al.  What some concepts might not be , 1983, Cognition.

[57]  H. Ebbinghaus Memory A Contribution Toexperimental Psychology , 1913 .

[58]  David J. Foulis,et al.  What are Quantum Logics and What Ought They to be , 1981 .

[59]  P. L. Tenpenny,et al.  Abstractionist versus episodic theories of repetition priming and word identification , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[60]  H. Pashler STEVENS' HANDBOOK OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY , 2002 .

[61]  David J. Foulis,et al.  Properties and operational propositions in quantum mechanics , 1983 .

[62]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Inconsistencies in Constituent Theories of World Views: Quantum Mechanical Examples , 1998 .

[63]  Dirk Aerts,et al.  State Property Systems and Orthogonality , 2002 .

[64]  Dominic Widdows,et al.  Orthogonal Negation in Vector Spaces for Modelling Word-Meanings and Document Retrieval , 2003, ACL.

[65]  Dirk Aerts,et al.  Description of many separated physical entities without the paradoxes encountered in quantum mechanics , 1982 .

[66]  David J. Foulis,et al.  Realism, operationalism, and quantum mechanics , 1983 .

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

[68]  Lotfi A. Zadeh,et al.  Fuzzy Sets , 1996, Inf. Control..

[69]  D. J. Foulis,et al.  The Operational Approach to Quantum Mechanics , 1978 .

[70]  D. Homa,et al.  Limitations of exemplar-based generalization and the abstraction of categorical information. , 1981 .

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

[72]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The Liar-paradox in a Quantum Mechanical Perspective , 1999 .

[73]  H. Ebbinghaus Über das Gedächtniss: Untersuchungen zur experimentellen Psychologie , 1885 .

[74]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Intrinsic contextuality as the crux of consciousness , 2013, 1310.7672.

[75]  Tarcisio Della Senta,et al.  No Matter, Never Mind , 2002 .

[76]  M. McCloskey,et al.  Natural categories: Well defined or fuzzy sets? , 1978 .

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

[78]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  On the Amnestic Modification of the Category of State Property Systems , 2002, Appl. Categorical Struct..

[79]  Dirk Aerts,et al.  Classical theories and nonclassical theories as special cases of a more general theory , 1983 .