Architecture matters: What Soar has to say about modularity

According to Zenon Pylyshyn, Allen Newell took the high road in psychology by working on a theory of the mind intended to cover a wide range of cognitive behavior. Both Newell and Pylyshyn have put forth convincing arguments about the merits of such a research path, and the central role that cognitive architecture plays in it one to develop detailed models of local phenomena while addressing global issues about the mind. One such issue that Pylyshyn has raised with respect to Soar is modularity The challenge is clear: how can a uniform theory such as Soar be right in the face of evidence that the mind is, in at least some respects, modular? As Pylyshyn points out, Newell (1990) began to answer this in his discussion of Fodor's 1983 monograph. There are two major parts to the answer. First, Soar can indeed admit additional processing modules since it is a bus-oriented system (the working 1

[1]  Allen Newell,et al.  Production Systems: Models of Control Structures , 1973 .

[2]  Gerry T. M. Altmann,et al.  Parsing and interpretation: An introduction , 1989 .

[3]  W D Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Sentence Perception as an Interactive Parallel Process , 1975, Science.

[4]  Kavi Mahesh,et al.  A Unified Process Model of Syntactic and Semantic Error Recovery in Sentence Understanding , 1994, ArXiv.

[5]  C. Clifton,et al.  The independence of syntactic processing , 1986 .

[6]  Arnold L. Glass,et al.  Context and distance-to-disambiguation effects in ambiguity resolution: Evidence from grammaticality judgments of garden path sentences , 1987 .

[7]  Jay L. Garfield,et al.  Modularity in Knowledge Representation and Natural-Language Understanding , 1987 .

[8]  M. Just,et al.  From the SelectedWorks of Marcel Adam Just 1992 A capacity theory of comprehension : Individual differences in working memory , 2017 .

[9]  M. A. Britt,et al.  Parsing in discourse: Context effects and their limits , 1992 .

[10]  Allen Newell,et al.  SOAR: An Architecture for General Intelligence , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[11]  John E. Laird,et al.  Dimensions of complexity in learning from interactive instruction , 1992, Other Conferences.

[12]  Allen Newell,et al.  Toward a Soar theory of taking instructions for immediate reasoning tasks , 1993 .

[13]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Interaction with context during human sentence processing , 1988, Cognition.

[14]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  Sentence processing: A tutorial review. , 1987 .

[15]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Ambiguity in context: A reply , 1989 .

[16]  Richard L. Lewis,et al.  Integrating knowledge sources in language comprehension , 1993 .

[17]  P. Sutherland,et al.  The Role of Language , 1992 .

[18]  M. Coltheart.  Attention and Performance XII: The Psychology of Reading , 1987 .

[19]  Mark Steedman,et al.  On not being led up the garden path : The use of context by the psychological syntax processor , 1985 .

[20]  Gerry T. M. Altmann,et al.  Ambiguity, parsing strategies, and computational models , 1988 .

[21]  A. Newell.  You can't play 20 questions with nature and win : projective comments on the papers of this symposium , 1973 .

[22]  Allen Newell,et al.  Natural Language Comprehension in Soar Spring 1991 , 1991 .

[23]  Edward Gibson,et al.  A computational theory of human linguistic processing: memory limitations and processing breakdown , 1991 .

[24]  Alan D Samples,et al.  SOAR Architecture , 1985 .

[25]  J. Fodor.  The Modularity of mind. An essay on faculty psychology , 1986 .

[26]  M. Just,et al.  The psychology of reading and language comprehension , 1986 .

[27]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  The On-Line Effects of Semantic Context on Syntactic Processing , 1977 .