CognitiveArchitecture

B.KiranMaruthi09005047
M.Sonika09005054
D.V.Ramana09005059

OUTLINE
WhatisCognitiveArchitecture?
PlausibilityofCognitiveArchitectures
TypeIdentityTheory
Functionalism
HistoryofCognitiveArchitecture
GeneralCharacteristics
Consciousness
UnifiedTheoryofCognition
SOARcasestudy

IntelligentAgents
Entitieswhichobservethroughsensorsandactuponthe
environmentusingactuatorsanddirecttheiractivitytowards
achievinggoals.

WhatisCognitiveArchitecture?
Blueprintforintelligentagents.

Itproposes(artificial)computationalprocessesthatact
likecognitivesystems(human)
Anapproachthatattemptstomodelbehavioralaswellas
structuralpropertiesofthemodeledsystem.

Aim:tomodelsystemsthataccountsforthewholeof
cognition,i.e.,systemswithArtificialConsciousness
whichcannotonlyrespondbutalsothink,perceiveand
believelikeahuman!

ArtificialConsciousness
ArtificialConsciousnessisbroadlyclassified
asaccessandphenomenalconsciousness.
Brainprocessesneuralimpulsesfrom
theeyesanddeterminesthatthisimageis
physicallyunstablepatternrecognizability.
Whataboutpain,anger,motivation,attention,feelingof
relevance,modelingotherpeople'sintentions,anticipating
consequencesofalternativeactions,orinventing?

PlausibilityofArtificial
Consciousness
AviewskepticalofACisheldbytypeidentitytheorists
consciousnesscanonlyberealizedinparticular
physicalsystemsbecauseconsciousnesshaspropertiesthat
necessarilydependonphysicalconstitution

However,forfunctionalists,
anysystemthatcaninstantiatethesamepatternof
causalroles,regardlessofphysicalconstitution,will
instantiatethesamementalstates,including
consciousness
Alongtheselines,sometheoristshaveproposedthat
consciousnesscanberealizedinproperlydesignedand
programmedcomputers.

TypeIdentityTheory
Thementaleventscanbegroupedintotypesand
associatedwithtypesofphysicaleventsinthebrain.
Forexample,mentaleventpainresultsinphysicaleventin
thebrain(likeCfiberfirings)
Wehavetwototallydifferentversionsoftypeidentity
theorybasedonthedefinitionofwhatkindofidentityis
associatedwithmentalandphysicalevents.
UllinPlace(1956)CompositionalIdentity
Feigl(1957)andSmart(1959)ReferentialIdentity

CompositionalTypeIdentityTheory
U.T.Place'snotionofidentityisdescribedasarelationof
composition.
Everymentalprocessiscomposedofasetofphysical
sensationstowhichitreacts.Butcanweassociatethem
basedpurelyoncomposition?
"lightningisanelectricaldischarge"istrue.

ReferentialTypeIdentityTheory
ForFeiglandSmart,theidentitywastobeinterpretedas
theidentitybetweenthereferentsoftwodescriptionswhich
referredtothesamething.
themorningstarandtheeveningstarareidenticalinthe
sensethatbothofthemrefertotheVenus.
Sensationsandbrainprocessesdoindeedmeandifferent
thingsbuttheyrefertothesamephysicalphenomenon.This
iscalledasTheFregeandistinction
Conclusion:Alloftheversionssharethecentralideathat
themindisidenticaltosomethingphysical.

IMPOSSIBRU!!!

MultipleRealizability
Objectionstothetype
identitytheory
HilaryPutnampopularizedit
inlate1960s.
Itstatesthatthesame
mentalproperty,state,or
eventcanbeimplementedby
differentphysicalproperties,
statesorevents.

Putnam'sFormulation
Doallorganismshavethesamebrainstructures?Clearly
not!

Paincorrespondstocompletelydifferentphysicalstatesand
yettheyallexperiencethesamementalstateof"beingin
pain."
Shouldrobotsbeconsideredaprioriincableofexpereincing
painjustbecausetheydidnotpossesthesame
neurochemistryashumans?
Putnamconcludedthattypeidentityismakingan
implausibleconjecture.

Functionalism
Coreideaisthatmentalstatesareconstitutedsolelybytheir
functionalrole
Theyarecausalrelationstoothermentalstates,sensory
inputs,andbehavioraloutputs.
Brainsarephysicaldeviceswithneuralsubstratethat
performcomputationsoninputswhichproducebehaviours.
Accordingtothistheoryitispossibletobuildsiliconbased
deviceswhicharefunctionallyisomorphictothehumans
aslongassystemperformsappropriatefunctions.

VariationsofFunctionalism
MachineStatefunctionalismHilaryPutnam
MentalstateislikeautomatonstateofaTuringMachine.
Eachstatecanbedefinedexclusivelyintermsofits
relationstotheotherstatesaswellasinputsandoutputs.
Beinginpainisthestatewhichdisposesonetocry"ouch"!

VariationsofFunctionalismCont...
PsychofunctionalismJerryFordor
Theroleofmentalstates,suchasbeliefanddesire,is
determinedbythefunctionalorcausalrolethatisdesignated
forthemwithinourbestscientificpsychologicaltheory.
Ifsomenewmentalstatefromfolkpsychologycomes,itis
considerednonexistentasithasnofundamentalrolein
cognitivepsychologicalexplaination.
Sometheoreticalcognitivepsychologicalstateswhichare
necessaryforexplainationofhumanbehaviourbutarenot
foreseenbynormalfolkpsychology,alsoexistinthesystem.

QuickQuestion

WhatdifferencedoesthecolourREDmake?

Qualia
FromtheLatin,meaning"whatkind".
referstothesubjectivequalitiesofsensoryperceptionand
thefeelingtheygenerate.
Qualiaisnotonlytherednessofred,butthewaythat
rednessmakesusfeel.
Qualiaare,inessence,ourownuniqueandpersonal
perceptionsofourenvironment.

Mary'sthoughtexperiment
FrankJacksonofferstheknowledgeargumentforqualia.
Mary,thecolourscientistknowsallthephysicalfactsabout
colourandtheexperienceofcolourwithotherpeople.

Confinedfrombirthtoaroomthatisblackandwhite.
Whensheisallowedtoleavetheroom,itmustbeadmitted
thatshelearnssomethingaboutthecolourredthefirsttime
sheseesitspecifically,shelearnswhatitisliketosee
thatcolour.
Thisattackstheknowledgecompletenessoffunctionalism.

AbilityHypothesis
Nemirowclaimsthat"knowingwhatanexperienceislikeis
thesameasknowinghowtoimaginehavingtheexperience".
HearguesthatMaryonlyobtainedtheabilitytodo
something,nottheknowledgeofsomethingnew.
Marygainedanabilityto"remember,imagineandrecognize."
Knowingwhatit'sliketoseeredismerelyasortofpractical
knowledge,aknowinghow(toimagine,remember,orre
identify,acertaintypeofexperience)ratherthana
knowledgeofpropositionsorfacts.

FunctionalIsomorphism
Putnamdefinedtheconceptoffunctionalisomorphismas:
Twosystemsarefunctionallyisomorphicifthereisa
correspondencebetweenthestatesofoneandthestatesof
theotherthatpreservesfunctionalrelations.

Presently...
Functionalismiswidelyacceptedandresearchtodevelop
cognitiverobotsison!

CognitiveArchitecture
UsingPutnam'sMultipleRealizabilityformulationand
functionalism,DavidChalmersinlate1960ssuggestedthe
possibiltyofmechanismsandstructuresthatunderlie
Cognition:
processorsthatmanipulatedata
memoriesthatholdknowledgeand
interfacesthatinteractwithanenvironment.

HistoryofCognitiveArchitecture
19692000(timeline)

 GPS (Ernst & Newell, 1969) Means-ends analysis, recursive subgoals

1970

ACT (Anderson, 1976) Human semantic memory

CAPS (Thibadeau, Just, Carpenter) Production system for modeling reading

1975

Soar (Laird, & Newell, 1983) Multi-method problem solving, production systems, and problem spaces

Theo (Mitchell et al., 1985) Frames, backward chaining, and EBL

1980

PRS (Georgeff & Lansky, 1986) Procedural reasoning & problem solving

BB1/AIS (Hayes-Roth & Hewitt 1988) Blackboard architecture, meta-level control

1985

Prodigy (Minton et al., 1989) Means-ends analysis, planning and EBL

MAX (Kuokka, 1991) Meta-level reasoning for planning and learning

1990

Icarus (Langley, McKusick, & Allen,1991) Concept learning, planning, and learning

3T (Gat, 1991) Integrated reactivity, deliberation, and planning

1995

CIRCA (Musliner, Durfee, & Shin, 1993) Real-time performance integrated with planning

AIS (Hayes-Roth 1995) Blackboard architecture, dynamic environment

2000

EPIC (Kieras & Meyer, 1997) Models of human perception, action, and reasoning

APEX (Freed et al., 1998) Model humans to support human computer designs

Characteristics
Holism,e.g.Unifiedtheoryofcognition
Thearchitectureoftentriestoreproducethebehaviorofthe
modelledsystem(human),inawaythattimelybehavior
(reactiontimes)ofbotharecomparable
Othercognitivelimitationsareoftenmodeledaswell
Robustbehavior
Parameterfree
ArtificiallyConscious

ArtificialConsciousness
ThefunctionsofconsciousnesssuggestedbyBernardBaars:
DefinitionandContextSetting
AdaptationandLearning
AnticipationFunction
PrioritizingandAccessControl
DecisionmakingorExecutiveFunction
AnalogyformingFunction
MetacognitiveandSelfmonitoringFunction
AutoprogrammingandSelfmaintenanceFunction
DefinitionalandContextsettingFunction.

Learning

Reactiontimeforconsecutivereadings?
HumanimprovementviaPractise

Anticipation
Machineneedsflexible,realtimecomponentsthatpredict
worlds.
Aconsciousmachineshouldmakecoherentpredictionsand
plans,forenvironmentsthatmaychange.
Executedonlywhenappropriatetosimulateandcontrolthe
realworld.
Significantresearchonroleofconsciousnessincognitive
models.Examples:CLARION,OpenCog

UnifiedTheoryofCognition
BookwrittenbyAllenNewell
Newell'sgoal:
Todefinethearchitectureofhumancognition,whichisthe
waythathumansprocessinformation.Thisarchitecture
mustexplainhowwereacttostimuli,exhibitgoaldirected
behavior,acquirerationalgoals,representknowledge,and
learn.

Newell'sCognitiveModel
NewellintroducesSoar,anarchitectureforgeneral
cognition.
Soaristhefirstproblemsolvertocreateitsownsubgoals
andlearncontinuouslyfromitsownexperience.
Soarhastheabilitytooperatewithintherealtime
constraintsofintelligentbehavior,suchasimmediate
responseanditemrecognitiontasks.

Soar
WhatisSoar?
HistoryofSoar
ArchitectureofSoar
EvolutionofSoarandpresentversion

WhatisSoar?
Soarisasymboliccognitivearchitecture.
AnAIprogramminglanguage.
Itprovidesa(cognitive)architecturalframework,within
whichyoucanconstructcognitivemodels.

Itcanbeconsideredasanintegratedarchitecturefor
knowledgebasedproblemsolving,learning,andinteraction
withexternalenvironments.

History
CreatedbyJohnLaird,AllenNewell,andPaulRosenbloom
atCarnegieMellonUniversityin1983.

JohnLairdAllenNewellPaulRosenbloom

It'sSoarnotSOAR!
Historically,SoarstoodforState,OperatorAndResult,
becauseallproblemsolvinginSoarisregardedasasearch
throughaproblemspaceinwhichyouapplyanoperatorto
astatetogetaresult.
Overtime,thecommunitynolongerregardedSoarasan
acronym:thisiswhyitisnolongerwritteninuppercase

ScreenshotSoarDebugger

ProblemSpaces
Soarrepresentsalltasksascollectionsofproblemspaces.
Problem spaces are made up of a set of states and operators
that manipulate the states.
Soar begins work on a task by choosing a problem space,
then an initial state in the space. Soar represents the goal of
the task as some final state in the problem space.

StructureofSoar
Soarcanbedividedinto3levels:
MemoryLevel
DecisionLevel
GoalLevel

MemoryLevel
Ageneralintelligencerequiresamemorywithalarge
capacityforthestorageofknowledge.
Avarietyoftypesofknowledgemustbestored,including:
declarativeknowledge
proceduralknowledge
episodicknowledge

LongtermProductionMemory
AllofSoar'slongtermknowledgeisstoredinasingle
productionmemory.
Eachproductionisaconditionactionstructurethat
performsitsactionswhenitsconditionsaremet.
Memoryaccessconsistsoftheexecutionofthese
productions.
Duringtheexecutionofaproduction,variablesinits
actionsareinstantiatedwithvalue.

WorkingMemory
Theresultofmemoryaccessistheretrievalofinformationinto
aglobalworkingmemory.
ItisthetemporarymemorythatcontainsallofSoar'sshort
termprocessingcontext.Ithas3components:
Thecontextstackspecifiesthehierarchyofactivegoals,
problemspaces,statesandoperators
objects,suchasgoalsandstates(andtheirsubobjects)
preferencesthatencodetheproceduralsearchcontrol
knowledge

Soar
Architecture

Preferences
Thereisonespecialtypeofworkingmemorystructure
thepreference
Preferencesencodecontrolknowledgeaboutthe
acceptabilityanddesirabilityofactions.
Acceptabilitypreferencesdeterminewhichactionsshould
beconsideredascandidates.
Desirabilitypreferencesdefineapartialorderingonthe
candidateactions.

DecisionLevel
Thedecisionlevelisbasedonthememorylevelplusan
architecturallyprovided,fixed,decisionprocedure.
Thedecisionlevelproceedsinatwophaseelaboratedecide
cycle.
Duringelaboration,thememoryisaccessedrepeatedly,in
parallel,untilquiescenceisreached;thatis,untilnomore
productionscanexecute.
Thisresultsintheretrievalintoworkingmemoryofallof
theaccessibleknowledgethatisrelevanttothecurrent
decision.
Afterquiescencehasoccurred,thedecisionprocedure
selectsoneoftheretrievedactionsbasedonthepreferences
thatwereretrievedintoworkingmemory.

GoalLevel
Ageneralintelligencemustbeabletosetandwork
towardsgoals.Thislevelisbasedonthedecisionlevel.
Goalsaresetwheneveradecisioncannotbemade;thatis,
whenthedecisionprocedurereachesanimpasse.
Impassesoccurwhentherearenoalternativesthatcanbe
selected(nochangeandrejectionimpasses)orwhenthere
aremultiplealternativesthatcanbeselected,but
insufficientdiscriminatingpreferencesexisttoallowa
choicetobemadeamongthem(tieandconflictimpasses).

ImpasseResolution
Wheneveranimpasseoccurs,thearchitecturegeneratesthe
goalofresolvingtheimpassewhichbecomesthesubgoal.
Alongwiththisgoal,anewperformancecontextiscreated.

Thecreationofanewcontextallowsdecisionstocontinueto
bemadeintheserviceofachievingthegoalofresolvingthe
impasse.
Astackofimpassesispossible.
Theoriginalgoalisresumedafteralltheimpassestackis
cleared.

LearningthroughChunking
Inadditiontoallabovelevels,ageneralintelligence
requirestheabilitytolearn.

Alllearningoccursbytheacquisitionofchunks
productionsthatsummarizetheproblemsolvingthat
occursinsubgoals,amechanismcalledChunking
Theactionsofachunkrepresenttheknowledgegenerated
duringthesubgoal;thatis,theresultsofthesubgoal.

EvolutionofSoar
YEAR

VERSION

IMPLEMENTED IN

1982

Soar 1

Lisp

1983

Soar 2

Lisp/OPS5

1984

Soar 3

1986

Soar 4

1989

Soar 5

1992

Soar 6

1996

Soar 7

Tcl/tk

Soar9:InterestingDevelopement
UnifyingCognitiveFunctionsandEmotionalAppraisal
Thefunctionalandcomputationalroleofemotionisopento
debate.
Appraisaltheoryistheideathatemotionsareextracted
fromourevaluations(appraisals)ofeventsthatcause
specificreactionsindifferentpeople.
Themaincontroversysurroundingthesetheoriesargues
thatemotionscannothappenwithoutphysiologicalarousal.

Appraisal'sDetector
Thistheoryproposesthatanagentcontinuallyevaluatesa
situationandthatevaluationleadstoemotion.
Theevaluationishypothesizedtotakeplacealongmultiple
dimensions,suchas
goalrelevance
goalconduciveness
causalityandcontrol
Thesedimensionsareexactlywhatanintelligentagent
needstocomputeasitpursuesitsgoalswhileinteracting
withanenvironment.

Conclusion
Thiseldstillhasfartotravelbeforeweunderstandfully
thespaceofcognitivearchitecturesandtheprinciplesthat
underlietheirsuccessfuldesignandutilization.
However,wenowhaveovertwodecadesexperiencewith
constructingandusingavarietysucharchitecturesfora
widerangeofproblems,alongwithanumberofchallenges
thathaveariseninthispursuit.
Ifthesceneryrevealedbytheseinitialstepsareany
indication,thejourneyaheadpromisesevenmore
interestingandintriguingsitesandattractions.

Soar9:AppraisalDetector

References
1)SOAR:AnArchitectureforGeneralIntelligence,JohnE.
Laird,AllenNewell,PaulS.Rosenbloom,1986.
2)ApreliminaryanalysisoftheSoararchitectureasabasis
forgeneralintelligence,JohnE.Laird,AllenNewell,Paul
S.Rosenbloom,1989.
3)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_architecture
4)http://cs.gmu.edu/~eclab/research.html
5)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_theory_of_cognition
6)http://cll.stanford.edu/research/ongoing/icarus/
7)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_consciousness
8)http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/functionalism/

References
9)ASurveyofCognitiveArchitectures,DavidE.Kieras,
UniversityofMichigan.
10)ConnectionismandCognitiveArchitecture:ACritical
Analysis,JerryA.FodorandZenonW.Pylyshyn,Rutgers
CenterforCognitiveScience,RutgersUniversity,New
Brunswick,NJ.
11)HumanCognitiveArchitecture,JohnSweller,University
ofNewSouthWales,Sydney,Australia.
12)http://cogarch.org/index.php/Soar/Architecture
13)http://code.google.com/p/soar/wiki/Documentation

References
14)AGentleIntroductiontoSoar:AnArchitecturefor
HumanCognition:2006Update,JillFainLehman,John
Laird,PaulRosenbloom.
15)http://sitemaker.umich.edu/soar/home