اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدAn Operational Semantics for the Cognitive Architecture ACT-R and its Translation to Constraint Handling Rules
95
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Computational psychology has the aim to explain human cognition by computational models of cognitive processes. The cognitive architecture ACT-R is popular to develop such models. Although ACT-R has a well-defined psychological theory and has been used to explain many cognitive processes, there are two problems that make it hard to reason formally about its cognitive models: First, ACT-R lacks a formalization of its underlying production rule system and secondly, there are many different implementations and extensions of ACT-R with technical artifacts complicating formal reasoning even more. This paper describes a formal operational semantics - the very abstract semantics - that abstracts from as many technical details as possible keeping it open to extensions and different implementations of the ACT-R theory. In a second step, this semantics is refined to define some of its abstract features that are found in many implementations of ACT-R - the abstract semantics. It concentrates on the procedural core of ACT-R and is suitable for analysis of the transition system since it still abstracts from details like timing, the sub-symbolic layer or conflict resolution. Furthermore, a translation of ACT-R models to the programming language Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) is defined. This makes the abstract semantics an executable specification of ACT-R. CHR has been used successfully to embed other rule-based formalisms like graph transformation systems or functional programming. There are many results and tools that support formal reasoning about and analysis of CHR programs. The translation of ACT-R models to CHR is proven sound and complete w.r.t. the abstract operational semantics of ACT-R. This paves the way to analysis of ACT-R models through CHR. Therefore, to the best of our knowledge, our abstract semantics is the first formulation of ACT-R suitable for both analysis and execution.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
Confluence denotes the property of a state transition system that states can be rewritten in more than one way yielding the same result. Although it is a desirable property, confluence is often too strict in practical applications because it also con
siders states that can never be reached in practice. Additionally, sometimes states that have the same semantics in the practical context are considered as different states due to different syntactic representations. By introducing suitable invariants and equivalence relations on the states, programs may have the property to be confluent modulo the equivalence relation w.r.t. the invariant which often is desirable in practice. In this paper, a sufficient and necessary criterion for confluence modulo equivalence w.r.t. an invariant for Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) is presented. It is the first approach that covers invariant-based confluence modulo equivalence for the de facto standard semantics of CHR. There is a trade-off between practical applicability and the simplicity of proving a confluence property. Therefore, a better manageable subset of equivalence relations has been identified that allows for the proposed confluence criterion and and simplifies the confluence proofs by using well established CHR analysis methods.
Computational cognitive modeling investigates human cognition by building detailed computational models for cognitive processes. Adaptive Control of Thought - Rational (ACT-R) is a rule-based cognitive architecture that offers a widely employed frame
work to build such models. There is a sound and complete embedding of ACT-R in Constraint Handling Rules (CHR). Therefore analysis techniques from CHR can be used to reason about computational properties of ACT-R models. For example, confluence is the property that a program yields the same result for the same input regardless of the rules that are applied. In ACT-R models, there are often cognitive processes that should always yield the same result while others e.g. implement strategies to solve a problem that could yield different results. In this paper, a decidable confluence criterion for ACT-R is presented. It allows to identify ACT-R rules that are not confluent. Thereby, the modeler can check if his model has the desired behavior. The sound and complete translation of ACT-R to CHR from prior work is used to come up with a suitable invariant-based confluence criterion from the CHR literature. Proper invariants for translated ACT-R models are identified and proven to be decidable. The presented method coincides with confluence of the original ACT-R models.
The most advanced implementation of adaptive constraint processing with Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) allows the application of intelligent search strategies to solve Constraint Satisfaction Problems (CSP). This presentation compares an improved ve
rsion of conflict-directed backjumping and two variants of dynamic backtracking with respect to chronological backtracking on some of the AIM instances which are a benchmark set of random 3-SAT problems. A CHR implementation of a Boolean constraint solver combined with these different search strategies in Java is thus being compared with a CHR implementation of the same Boolean constraint solver combined with chronological backtracking in SICStus Prolog. This comparison shows that the addition of ``intelligence to the search process may reduce the number of search steps dramatically. Furthermore, the runtime of their Java implementations is in most cases faster than the implementations of chronological backtracking. More specifically, conflict-directed backjumping is even faster than the SICStus Prolog implementation of chronological backtracking, although our Java implementation of CHR lacks the optimisations made in the SICStus Prolog system. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP).
Constraint Handling Rules (CHR) is a declarative rule-based formalism and language. Concurrency is inherent as rules can be applied to subsets of constraints in parallel. Parallel implementations of CHR, be it in software, be it in hardware, use diff
erent execution strategies for parallel execution of CHR programs depending on the implementation language. In this report, our goal is to analyze parallel execution of CHR programs from a more general conceptual perspective. We want to experimentally see what is possible when CHR programs are automatically parallelized. For this purpose, a sequential simulation of parallel CHR execution is used to systematically encode different parallel execution strategies. In exhaustive experiments on some typical examples from the literature, parallel and sequential execution can be compared to each other. The number of processors can be bounded or unbounded for a more theoretical analysis. As a result, some preliminary but indicative observations on the influence of the execution strategy can be made for the different problem classes and in general.
The primary goal of this paper is to present a unified way to transform the syntax of a logic system into certain initial algebraic structure so that it can be studied algebraically. The algebraic structures which one may choose for this purpose are
various clones over a full subcategory of a category. We show that the syntax of equational logic, lambda calculus and first order logic can be represented as clones or right algebras of clones over the set of positive integers. The semantics is then represented by structures derived from left algebras of these clones.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
