The GTR-model: a universal framework for quantum-like measurements

We present a very general geometrico-dynamical description of physical or more abstract entities, called the 'general tension-reduction' (GTR) model, where not only states, but also measurement-interactions can be represented, and the associated outcome probabilities calculated. Underlying the model is the hypothesis that indeterminism manifests as a consequence of unavoidable fluctuations in the experimental context, in accordance with the 'hidden-measurements interpretation' of quantum mechanics. When the structure of the state space is Hilbertian, and measurements are of the 'universal' kind, i.e., are the result of an average over all possible ways of selecting an outcome, the GTR-model provides the same predictions of the Born rule, and therefore provides a natural completed version of quantum mechanics. However, when the structure of the state space is non-Hilbertian and/or not all possible ways of selecting an outcome are available to be actualized, the predictions of the model generally differ from the quantum ones, especially when sequential measurements are considered. Some paradigmatic examples will be discussed, taken from physics and human cognition. Particular attention will be given to some known psychological effects, like question order effects and response replicability, which we show are able to generate non-Hilbertian statistics. We also suggest a realistic interpretation of the GTR-model, when applied to human cognition and decision, which we think could become the generally adopted interpretative framework in quantum cognition research.

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

[2]  K. Życzkowski,et al.  Geometry of the Set of Mixed Quantum States: An Apophatic Approach , 2011, 1112.2347.

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

[4]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Beyond-Quantum Modeling of Question Order Effects and Response Replicability in Psychological Measurements , 2015, ArXiv.

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

[6]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The extended Bloch representation of quantum mechanics and the hidden-measurement solution to the measurement problem , 2014, 1404.2429.

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

[8]  Peter beim Graben,et al.  Quantum cognition and bounded rationality , 2015, Synthese.

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

[10]  M. Schlosshauer Decoherence, the measurement problem, and interpretations of quantum mechanics , 2003, quant-ph/0312059.

[11]  Richard M. Shiffrin,et al.  Context effects produced by question orders reveal quantum nature of human judgments , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  David W. Moore Measuring New Types of Question-Order Effects: Additive and Subtractive , 2002 .

[13]  Jerome R Busemeyer,et al.  Can quantum probability provide a new direction for cognitive modeling? , 2013, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[14]  G. Kimura The Bloch Vector for N-Level Systems , 2003 .

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

[16]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  Response Effects in Surveys , 1987 .

[17]  Gerd Niestegge,et al.  An Approach to Quantum Mechanics via Conditional Probabilities , 2008 .

[18]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  New fundamental evidence of non-classical structure in the combination of natural concepts , 2015, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[19]  Helly Grundbegriffe der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung , 1936 .

[20]  Andrzej Kossakowski,et al.  The Bloch-Vector Space for N-Level Systems: the Spherical-Coordinate Point of View , 2005, Open Syst. Inf. Dyn..

[21]  Arvind,et al.  A generalized Pancharatnam geometric phase formula for three-level quantum systems , 1996, quant-ph/9605042.

[22]  Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi,et al.  Using simple elastic bands to explain quantum mechanics: a conceptual review of two of Aerts’ machine-models , 2011, 1112.4045.

[23]  L. Rips,et al.  The Psychology of Survey Response , 2000 .

[24]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The entity and modern physics: the creation-discovery- view of reality 1 , 1998 .

[25]  N. Shackel Bertrand’s Paradox and the Principle of Indifference* , 2007, Philosophy of Science.

[26]  S. Presser,et al.  Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form, Wording, and Context , 1996 .

[27]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Entanglement of Conceptual Entities in Quantum Model Theory (QMod) , 2012, QI.

[28]  Peter beim Graben,et al.  Descriptive and Foundational Aspects of Quantum Cognition , 2014, 1410.3961.

[29]  L. I. Ponomarev,et al.  The Quantum Dice , 2021 .

[30]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Many-Measurements or Many-Worlds? A Dialogue , 2014, 1406.0620.

[31]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  Ubiquitous Quantum Structure: From Psychology to Finance , 2010 .

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

[33]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The extended Bloch representation of quantum mechanics: Explaining superposition, interference, and entanglement , 2015, 1504.04781.

[34]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The unreasonable success of quantum probability II: Quantum measurements as universal measurements , 2014, Journal of Mathematical Psychology.

[35]  Kirsty Kitto,et al.  Why Quantum Theory , 2008 .

[36]  Murray,et al.  Probability of a tossed coin landing on edge. , 1993, Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics.

[37]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  The Unreasonable Success of Quantum Probability I: Quantum Measurements as Uniform Fluctuations , 2014, 1401.2647.

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

[39]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Quantum Structure in Cognition, Origins, Developments, Successes and Expectations , 2015, ArXiv.

[40]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Quantum Models for Psychological Measurements: An Unsolved Problem , 2014, PloS one.

[41]  W. W. Hansen,et al.  Nuclear Induction , 2011 .

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

[43]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Do spins have directions? , 2015, Soft Comput..

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

[45]  Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi,et al.  A remark on the role of indeterminism and non-locality in the violation of Bell’s inequalities , 2013, 1302.5826.

[46]  Guillaume Adenier,et al.  Is the fair sampling assumption supported by EPR experiments , 2007 .

[47]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Solving the hard problem of Bertrand's paradox , 2014, 1403.4139.

[48]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Entanglement Zoo II: Examples in Physics and Cognition , 2013, QI.

[49]  N. Khaneja,et al.  Characterization of the Positivity of the Density Matrix in Terms of the Coherence Vector Representation , 2003, quant-ph/0302024.

[50]  Gerard J. Milburn,et al.  Geometry of quantum states: an introduction to quantum entanglement by Ingemar Bengtsson and Karol Zyczkowski , 2006, Quantum Inf. Comput..

[51]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Entanglement Zoo I: Foundational and Structural Aspects , 2013, QI.

[52]  Jerome R. Busemeyer,et al.  A Quantum Question Order Model Supported by Empirical Tests of an A Priori and Precise Prediction , 2013, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[53]  A. Tversky,et al.  The Disjunction Effect in Choice under Uncertainty , 1992 .

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

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