(45-4) 10 * << * >> * Russian * English * Content * All Issues

Modeling of quantum-like cognitive phenomena by the Fourier-holography technique under the choice of alternatives
A.V. Pavlov 1

1 ITMO University, St. Petersburg, Russia

 PDF, 953 kB

DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-CO-830

Pages: 551-561.

Full text of article: Russian language.

Abstract:
The article is dedicated to the search for a biologically motivated mechanism of the cognitive phenomenon of violation of the classical formula of total probability for the disjunction of incompatible events, which is considered by a number of researchers as a quantum-like phenomenon. A classical mechanism implemented by the 6f Fourier holography scheme of the resonant architecture that does not require reference to quantum mechanics either in its physical nature or at the level of formalism is demonstrated. In the analysis, the decision-making is interpreted as a choice of alternatives by using the non-cooperative game "Prisoner's Dilemma". The approach to the task is based on the search for a mechanism for forming a conditional estimate under a condition that contradicts the rule of monotonous decision logic. It is demonstrated that this estimate, in contrast to the unconditional and conditional one with a non-contradictory condition, is formed by logic with exception. The ring architecture of the holographic setup corresponds to the biologically inspired neural network concept of the excitation ring and implements cognitive dissonance on logic with exception. Conditions and ranges of violation of the classical formula of total probability in relation to the correlation radius of the reference image recorded in a hologram storing the monotone logic inference rule are analytically determined. The analytical model is confirmed by a quantitative coincidence of the results of numerical modeling with the published results of natural experiments.

Keywords:
Fourier holography, decision making, choice of alternatives, quadratic measure, estimate, quantum probability, non-cooperative games, logic with exclusion, cognitive dissonance, dynamical system, correlation length, order parameter.

Citation:
Pavlov AV. Modeling of quantum-like cognitive phenomena by the Fourier-holography technique under the choice of alternatives. Computer Optics 2021; 45(4): 551-561. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-CO-830.

Acknowledgements:
The work was funded by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research under grant #18-01-00676-a.

References:
  1. Slussarenko S, Pryde GJ. Photonic quantum information processing: A concise review. Appl Phys Rev 2019; 6: 041303. DOI: 10.1063/1.5115814.
  2. Pavelev AV, Semin VV. Investigation of non-markovian dynamics of two dipole interacting qubits based on numerical solution of the non-linear stochastic Schrödinger equation. [In Russian]. Computer Optics 2019; 43(2): 168-173. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-2019-43-2-168-173.
  3. Khrennikov A, Asano M. A quantum-like model of information processing in the brain. Appl Sci 2020; 10(2): 707. DOI: 10.3390/app10020707.
  4. Human-like computing: Report of a Workshop held on 17 & 18 February 2016, Bristol, UK. Source: <https://epsrc.ukri.org/newsevents/pubs/humanlikecomputing>.
  5. Lake BM, Ullman TD, Tenenbaum TB, Gershman SJ. Building machines that learn and think like people. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2017; 40: e253. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X16001837.
  6. Gorbatsevich VS, Moiseenko AS, Vizilter YV. FaceDetectNet: Face detection via fully convolutional network. Computer Optics 2019; 43(1): 63-71. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-2019-43-1-63-71
  7. Wang W, Yang Y, Wang X, Wang W, Li J. Development of convolutional neural network and its application in image classification: a survey. Opt Eng 2019; 58(4): 040901. DOI: 10.1117/1.OE.58.4.040901.
  8. Bragin AD, Spitsyn VG. Motor imagery recognition in electroencephalograms using convolutional neural networks. Computer Optics 2020; 44(3): 482-487. DOI: 10.18287/2412- 6179-CO-669.
  9. Agafonova YuD, Gaidel AV, Zelter PM, Kapishnikov AV. Efficiency of machine learning algorithms and convolutional neural network for detection of pathological changes in MR images of the brain. Computer Optics 2020; 44(2): 266-273. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-CO-671.
  10. Pashina TA, Gaidel AV, Zelter PM, Kapishnikov AV, Nikonorov AV. Automatic highlighting of the region of interest in computed tomography images of the lungs. Computer Optics 2020; 44(1): 74-81. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-CO-659.
  11. Vasilchenko VA, Burkovskiy VL, Danilov AD. Algorithmization of the process of recognition of states of living objects based on special x-ray images. Computer Optics 2019; 43(2): 296-303. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-2017-43-2-296-303.
  12. Gorbachev VA, Krivorotov IA, Markelov AO, Kotlyarova EV. Semantic segmentation of satellite images of airports using convolutional neural networks. Computer Optics 2020; 44(4): 636-645. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-CO-636.
  13. Dash T, Dambekodi SN, Reddy PN, Abraham A. Adversarial neural networks for playing hide-and-search board game Scotland Yard. Neural Comput Appl 2020; 32: 3149-3164. DOI: 10.1007/s00521-018-3701-0.
  14. Bohush RP, Zakharava IY. Person tracking algorithm based on convolutional neural network for indoor video surveillance. Computer Optics 2020; 40(1): 109-116. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-CO-565.
  15. Sarin KS, Hodashinsky IA. Bagged ensemble of fuzzy classifiers and feature selection for handwritten signature verification. Computer Optics 2019; 43(5): 833-845. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-2019-43-5-833-845.
  16. Rakhmanenko IA, Shelupanov AA, Kostyuchenko EYu. Automatic text-independent speaker verification using convolutional deep belief network. Computer Optics 2020; 44(4): 596-605. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-CO-621.
  17. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 1974; 185: 1124-1131. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124.
  18. Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981; 211: 453-458. doi: 10.1126/science.7455683.
  19. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Rational choice and the framing of decisions. Business 1986; 59: 251-278. doi: 10.1086/296365.
  20. Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1982.
  21. Kahneman D, Tversky A. Prospect theory – an analysis of decision under risk. Economics 1979; 47: 263-292. doi: 10.2307/1914185.
  22. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychol Rev 1983; 90(4): 293-315. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.90.4.293.
  23. Tversky A, Shafir E. The disjunction effect in choice under uncertainty. Psychol Sci 1992; 3(5): 305-309. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00678.x.
  24. Crosson R. The disjunction effect and reason-based choice in games. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1999; 80: 118-133. DOI: 10.1006/obhd.1999.2846.
  25. Li S, Taplin J.  Examining whether there is a disjunction effect in Prisoner’s Dilemma games. Chinese Journal of Psychology 2002; 44(1): 25-46.
  26. Busemeyer JR, Matthew М, Wang ZA. Quantum game theory explanation of disjunction effects. Proc 28th Annual Conf of the Cognition Science Society 2006: 131-135.
  27. Hristova E, Grinberg M. Disjunction effect in prisoner’s dilemma: evidences from an eye-tracking. Proc 30th Annual Conf of the Cognition Science Society 2008; 1225-1230.
  28. Adams B, Petruccione F. Quantum effects in the brain: A review. AVS Quantum Science 2020; 2: 022901. DOI: 10.1116/1.5135170.
  29. Menskii MB. Concept of consciousness in the context of quantum mechanics. Phys Usp 2005; 48(4): 389-409. DOI: 10.1070/PU2005v048n04ABEH002075.
  30. Trueblood JS, Pothos EM, Busemeyer JR. Quantum probability theory as a common framework for reasoning and similarity. Front Psychol 2014; 5: 322. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00322.
  31. Pothos EM, Busemeyer JR. A quantum probability explanation for violations of 'rational' decision theory. Proc Royal Soc B 2009; 279: 2171-2178. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2009.0121.
  32. Busemeyer JR, Pothos EM, Franco R, Trueblood JS. A quantum theoretical explanation for probability judgment “errors” Psychol Rev 2011; 118(2): 193-218. DOI: 10.1037/a0022542.
  33. Broekaert JB, Busemeyer JR, Pothos EM. The Disjunction Effect in two-stage simulated gambles. An experimental study and comparison of a heuristic logistic, Markov and quantum-like model. Cogn Psychol 2020; 117: 101262. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2019.101262.
  34. Bagarello F, Basieva I, Pothos EM, Khrennikov A. Quantum like modeling of decision making: Quantifying uncertainty with the aid of Heisenberg–Robertson inequality. J Math Psychol 2018; 84: 49-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmp.2018.03.004.
  35. He Z, Jiang W. An evidential dynamical model to predict the interference effect of categorization on decision making results. Knowl Based Syst 2018; 150: 139-149. DOI: 10.1016/j.knosys.2018.03.014.
  36. Zheltikov AM. The critique of quantum mind: measurement, consciousness, delayed choice, and lost coherence. Phys Usp 2018; 61(10): 1016-1025. DOI: 10.3367/UFNe.2017.06.038155.
  37. Pavlov AV, Orlov VV. Modelling the mechanisms of quantum logic using the method of superimposed Fourier holograms based on the nonlinearity of the exposure characteristics of holographic recording media [In Russian]. Quantum Electronics 2019; 49(3): 246-252. DOI: 10.1070/QEL16748.
  38. Pavlov AV. Simulation of quantum logic in linear recording of superimposed Fourier holograms: Linda phenomenon [In Russian]. Quantum Electronics 2019; 49(8): 777-778. DOI: 10.1070/QEL16939.
  39. Pavlov AV Neural networks mechanisms for the quantum-like phenomenon “Linda”. In Book: Shelepin Yu, Ogorodnikova E, Solovyev N, Yakimova E, eds. Neural networks and neurotechnologies. Ch 20. Saint-Petersburg: "VVM" Publisher; 2019: 145-163.
  40. Orlov RS. Normal physyology [In Russian]. 2nd ed. Мoscow: “GEOTAR-Media” Publisher; 2010. ISBN: 978-5-9704-1662-4.
  41. Edelman GM. The remembered present. A biologocal theory of consciousness. New York: Basics Books; 1989.
  42. Ivanitskii AM. The cerebral basis of subjective experiences: the hypothesis of information synthesis [In Russian]. Zhurnal Vysshei Nervnoii Deiatelnosty 1996; 46(2): 241-252.
  43. Ivanitskii AM. Information synthesis in key parts of the cer-ebral cortex as the basis of subjective. Neurosci Behav Physiol 1997; 27: 414-426. DOI: 10.1007/BF02462943.
  44. Nogin VD. Decision-making in a multi-criteria environment: a quantitative approach [In Russian]. Moscow: “Fizmatlit” Publisher; 2002. ISBN: 5-9221-0274-5.
  45. Nash JF Non-cooperative games. Ann Math 1951; 54(2): 286-295. DOI: 10.2307/1969529.
  46. Feinman RF, Leighton RB, Sands M. The Feinman lectures on physics. Vol. 3. London: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Inc; 1965.
  47. Pavlov AV. Holographic memory updated by contradictory information: influence of low frequency attenuation on response stability. Computer Optics 2020; 44(5): 728-736. DOI: 10.18287/2412-6179-CO-668.
  48. Pavlov AV. Logic with exception on the algebra of fourier-dual operations: neural net mechanism of cognitive dissonance reducing [in Russian]. Nauchno-Technicheskii Vestnik Informatcionnych Technologii, Mechaniki i Optiki 2014; 89(1): 17-25.
  49. Reiter R. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 1980; 13(1-2): 81-132.
  50. Glezer VD. Matched filtering in the visual system. J Opt Technol 1999; 66(10): 853-856. DOI: 10.1364/JOT.66.000853.
  51. Alekseenko SV. The architecture of connections in the visual cortex and visual recognition. J Opt Technol 1999; 66(10): 886-887. DOI: 10.1364/JOT.66.000886.
  52. Krasilnikov NN, Krasilnikova OI. Matched spatial filtering object images in the human visual system. Proceedings of the 2019 Wave Electronics and its Application in Information and Telecommunication Systems (WECONF) 2019: 1-4. DOI: 10.1109/WECONF.2019.8840630.
  53. Pavlov AV. Algebra of Fourier-dual operations: Logic with exclusion [In Russian]. Artificial Intelligence and Decision Making 2012; 3: 26-38.
  54. Zadeh LA. The concept of a Linguistic Variable ans its application to approximate reasoning – I. Inf Sci 1975; 8(1): 199-249. DOI: 10.1016/0020-0255(75)90036-5.
  55. Borisyuk GN, Borisyuk RM, Kazanovich YaB, Ivanitskii GR. Models of neural dynamics in brain information processing – the developments of ’the decade’. Phys Usp 2002; 45(10): 1073-1095. DOI: 10.1070/PU2002v045n10ABEH001143.
  56. Shubnikov EI. Signal to noise ratio under correlation comparison of images. Optics and Spectroscopy 1987; 62(2): 268-272.
  57. Pavlov AV. On algebraic foundations of Fourier holography. Optics and Spectroscopy 2001; 90(3): 452-457. DOI: 10.1134/1.1358459
  58. Khrennikov AYu. A formula of total probability with interference term and the Hilbert space representation of the contextual Kolmogorov model. Theory Probab its Appl 2006; 51(3): 427-441. DOI: 10.1137/S0040585X97982505.
  59. Cervantes S, Lopez S, Cervantes L-A. Toward ethical cognitive architectures for the development of artificial moral agents. Cogn Syst Res 2020; 64: 117-125. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogsys.2020.08.010.
  60. Qu C, Hu Y, Tang Z, Derrington E, Dreher J-C. Neurocomputational mechanisms underlying immoral decisions benefiting self or others. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 2020; 15(2): 135-149. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsaa029.
  61. Tarraf DC, Shelton W, Parker E, et al. The Department of Defense Posture for Artificial Intelligence: Assessment and recommendations. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation; 2019. DOI: 10.7249/RR4229.
  62. Sayler KM. Artificial intelligence and national security. Congressional Research Service. R45178. Nov 10, 2020. Source: <https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R45178.pdf>.
  63. Du J, Xia J, Li H. Army integrated combat model for synthetic force based on information cognition. J Phys Conf Ser 2020; 1533(2): 022125. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1533/2/022125.
  64. Botros H, Tran CS, Nam D. I-Guided reasoning-based operator support system for the nuclear power plant management. Ann Nucl Energy 2021; 154: 108079. DOI: 10.1016/j.anucene.2020.108079.
  65. Tanveer A, Dongdong Z, Chao H, et al. Artificial intelligence in sustainable energy industry: Status Quo, challenges and opportunities. J Clean Prod 2021; 289: 125834. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.125834.
  66. Suman S. Artificial intelligence in nuclear industry: Chimera or solution? J Clean Prod 2021: 278: 124022. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124022.
  67. Davydenko L, Davydenko N, Davydenko V. Neural networks application for power consumption planning of the water supply facilities. 2020 IEEE Open Conference of Electrical, Electronic and Information Sciences (eStream) 2020: 1-4. DOI: 10.1109/eStream50540.2020.9108856.

© 2009, IPSI RAS
151, Molodogvardeiskaya str., Samara, 443001, Russia; E-mail: journal@computeroptics.ru ; Tel: +7 (846) 242-41-24 (Executive secretary), +7 (846) 332-56-22 (Issuing editor), Fax: +7 (846) 332-56-20