An Integrated Theory of the Mind

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling

An Integrated Theory of the Mind

John R. Anderson and Daniel BothellMichael D. Byrne

Lim, Soo Yong

Psychological Review, 2004, Vol. 111, No. 4, 1036-1060

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling

Contents

• Introduction

• The ACT-R 5.0 Architecture

• The Perceptual-Motor System

• The Goal Module

• The Declarative Module

• Procedural Memory

• Putting It All Together: The Effects of In-

struction and Practice in a Dynamic Task

• Putting It All Together: Tracking Multiple

Buffers in an fMRI Study

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling1. Introduction

• There has been a move toward viewing the mind as consisting of a set of special-ized components.

• “How is it all put back together?”

• Newell (1990) argued for cognitive architectures that would explain how all the components of the mind worked to produce coherent cognition – Soar system

• John R. Anderson et al. - ACT-R is best hypothesis about the architecture.

• The goal of this article– To describe how cognition is integrated in the ACT-R theory

• This article develops two advantages1. producing a theory that is capable of attacking real-world problems

2. producing a theory that is capable of integrating the mass of data from cognitive neuroscience meth-ods like brain imaging

3/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling2. The ACT-R 5.0 Architecture

4/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling3. The Perceptual-Motor System

• ACT-R historically was focused on higher level cognition and not perception or ac-tion.

• However, this division of labor tends to lead to a treatment of cognition that is to-tally abstracted from the perceptual-motor systems, and there is reason to suppose that the nature of cognition is strongly determined by its perceptual and motor pro-cesses.

• The primary difference between ACT-R’s perceptual-motor machinery and EPIC’s– Visual System– ACT-R : visual-location module and visual-object module

• the fixed-time approximation : 185ms

• Salvucci’s (2001) EMMA (Eye Movements and Movement of Attention)

5/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling3. The Perceptual-Motor System (Cont’)

• Schumacher et al. (1997)– An instance of perfect time sharing

6/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling4. The Goal Module

• The goal module has this responsibility of keeping track of what these intentions are so that behavior will serve that goal.

• the Tower of Hanoi task – Subgoals

• Imaginal Module

7/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling5. The Declarative Module

• Activation theory– Behavior is controlled by a set of equations and parameters

8/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling5. The Declarative Module (Cont’)

• The Fan Effect– Sji = S – ln (fanj)– A hippie is in the park.– A hippie is in the store.– A doctor is in the park.– A fireman is in the bank.– ⁞

9/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling6. Procedural Memory

• At any point in time multiple production rules might apply, only one can be se-lected, and this is the one with the highest utility.– seriality in production rule execution

• Production Compilation (Pair Test)– “Vanilla – 7” “Bank – 0”– “Jack – 6” “Xray – 8”

10/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling

7. Putting It All Together: The Effects of Instruction and Practice in a Dynamic Task

• We now turn to discussing how they work together to contribute to modeling com-plex real-world tasks.

• The Dynamic Task: The Anti-Air Warfare Coordinator (AAWC)

11/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling

7. Putting It All Together: The Effects of Instruction and Practice in a Dynamic Task (Cont’)

• The Dynamic Task: The Anti-Air Warfare Coordinator (AAWC)

12/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling

7. Putting It All Together: The Effects of Instruction and Practice in a Dynamic Task (Cont’)

• The Dynamic Task: The Anti-Air Warfare Coordinator (AAWC)

13/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling

8. Putting It All Together: Tracking Multiple Buffers in an fMRI Study

• One of the goals of this research is to find neural anchors for the concepts in the ACT–R model.– ②P 4 ↔ 5. ③ ② – 0 trans– ②P ↔ 5 4. ② ② – 1 trans– P ↔ 5 4. ③ ③ – 2 trans

motor area - manual

Prefrontal region - retrieval

posterior parietal lobe - imaginal

14/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling

8. Putting It All Together: Tracking Multiple Buffers in an fMRI Study

15/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive Modeling9. General Discussion

• The ACT–R architecture is incomplete.

• It is missing certain modules.

• Although the analysis in ACT–R is certainly neither complete nor totally correct, we close with review of the answer it gives to how cognition is integrated.

16/17

Korea Univ.Division Information Management Engineering

UI Lab.

IMS 802 Cognitive ModelingQ & A

?Q & A

17/17