A unifying computational model of decision making
- 29 Downloads
Decision making has long been of interest as a descriptive phenomenon in psychology and as a generative one in artificial intelligence. Research ranges from general, descriptive models of heuristic decision making to detailed studies of decision parameters. This paper introduces a model that formalizes and integrates several descriptive models so that it can serve both as a framework for psychological models and as an algorithm for computational decision making. We set special focus on the instantiation of this model with respect to aggregating cue values by reviewing some methods from the field of computational social choice. To show its applicability in the context of artificial intelligence we present a case study of computational problem solving.
KeywordsDecision making Heuristics Computational social choice
This research was supported by the Bavarian Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The author declares no conflict of interest.
Human and animal rights
The research involved no human participants or animals.
- Ariely D (2010) Predictably irrational: the hidden forces that shape our decisions. Harper Perennial, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Gharajedaghi J (2011) Systems thinking: managing chaos and complexity, 3rd edn. Morgan Kaufmann, BurlingtonGoogle Scholar
- Gigerenzer G (2001) The adaptive toolbox. In: Gigerenzer G, Selten R (eds) Bounded rationality: the adaptive toolbox. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Gigerenzer G, Goldstein DG (1999) Betting on one good reason: the take the best heuristic. In: Gigerenzer G, Todd PM, The ABC Research Group (eds) Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Hertwig R, Hoffrage U, Martignon L (1999) Quick estimation: letting the environment do the work. In: Gigerenzer G, Todd PM, The ABC Research Group (eds) Simple Heuristics that make us smart. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Kirsch A (2011) Humanlike problem solving in the context of the traveling salesperson problem. In: AAAI fall symposium on advances in cognitive systemsGoogle Scholar
- Kirsch A (2012) Hierarchical knowledge for heuristic problem solving—a case study on the traveling salesperson problem. In: First annual conference on advances in cognitive systemsGoogle Scholar
- Kirsch A (2016) Heuristic decision-making for human-aware navigation in domestic environments. In: 2nd global conference on artificial intelligence (GCAI)Google Scholar
- Kirsch A (2017) A modular approach of decision-making in the context of robot navigation in domestic environments. In: 3rd global conference on artificial intelligence (GCAI)Google Scholar
- Kotseruba I, Tsotsos JK (2016) A review of 40 years of cognitive architecture research: core cognitive abilities and practical applications. arXiv:1610.08602
- Langley P (2017) Progress and challenges in research on cognitive architectures. In: Proceedings of the thirty-first AAAI conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI-17)Google Scholar
- Lee MD, Newell BR (2011) Using hierarchical bayesian methods to examine the tools of decision-making. Judgm Decis Mak 6(8):832–842Google Scholar
- MacGregor JN, Chu Y (2011) Human performance on the traveling salesman and related problems: a review. J Prob Solving 3(2):2Google Scholar
- March JG (1988) Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 33–57Google Scholar
- Marewski JN, Mehlhorn K (2011) Using the ACT-R architecture to specify 39 quantitative process models of decision making. Judgm Decis Mak 6(6):439–519Google Scholar
- Newell A, Simon H (1972) Human problem solving. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
- Rieskamp J, Hoffrage U (1999) When do people use simple heuristics and how can we tell? In: Gigerenzer G, Todd PM, The ABC Research Group (eds) Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Russell S, Norvig P (2003) Artificial intelligence—a modern approach. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
- Russo JE, Dosher BA (1983) Strategies for multiattribute binary choice. J Exp Psychol: Learn Mem Cognit 9(4):676–696Google Scholar
- Simon HA (1996) The sciences of the artificial, 3rd edn. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Tak S, Plaisier M, van Rooij I (2008) Some tours are more equal than others: the convex-hull model revisited with lessons for testing models of the traveling salesperson problem. J Prob Solv 2(1):2Google Scholar
- Zwicker WS (2016) Introduction to the theory of voting, chapter 2. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar