Concept combination and the origins of complex cognition

At the core of our uniquely human cognitive abilities is the capacity to see things from different perspectives, or to place them in a new context. We propose that this was made possible by two cognitive transitions. First, the large brain of Homo erectus facilitated the onset of recursive recall: the ability to string thoughts together into a stream of potentially abstract or imaginative thought. This hypothesis is sup-ported by a set of computational models where an artificial society of agents evolved to generate more diverse and valuable cultural outputs under conditions of recursive recall. We propose that the capacity to see things in context arose much later, following the appearance of anatomically modern humans. This second transition was brought on by the onset of contextual focus: the capacity to shift between a minimally contextual analytic mode of thought, and a highly contextual associative mode of thought, conducive to combining concepts in new ways and ‘breaking out of a rut’. When contextual focus is implemented in an art-generating computer program, the resulting artworks are seen as more creative and appealing. We summarize how both transitions can be modeled using a theory of concepts which high-lights the manner in which different contexts can lead to modern humans attributing very different meanings to the interpretation of one concept.

A probabilistic framework for analysing the compositionality of conceptual combinations

Conceptual combination performs a fundamental role in creating the broad range of compound phrases utilised in everyday language. While the systematicity and productivity of language provide a strong argument in favour of assuming compositionality, this very assumption is still regularly questioned in both cognitive science and philosophy. This article provides a novel probabilistic framework for assessing whether the semantics of conceptual combinations are compositional, and so can be considered as a function of the semantics of the constituent concepts, or not. Rather than adjudicating between different grades of compositionality, the framework presented here contributes formal methods for determining a clear dividing line between compositional and non-compositional semantics. Compositionality is equated with a joint probability distribution modelling how the constituent concepts in the combination are interpreted. Marginal selectivity is emphasised as a pivotal probabilistic constraint for the application of the Bell/CH and CHSH systems of inequalities (referred to collectively as Bell-type). Non-compositionality is then equated with either a failure of marginal selectivity, or, in the presence of marginal selectivity, with a violation of Bell-type inequalities. In both non-compositional scenarios, the conceptual combination cannot be modelled using a joint probability distribution with variables corresponding to the interpretation of the individual concepts. The framework is demonstrated by applying it to an empirical scenario of twenty-four non-lexicalised conceptual combinations.

Testing for the non-separability of bi-ambiguous compounds

Separability is a concept that is very difficult to define, and yet much of our scientific method is implicitly based upon the assumption that systems can sensibly be reduced to a set of interacting components. This paper examines the notion of separability in the creation of bi-ambiguous compounds that is based upon the CHSH and CH inequalities. It reports results of an experiment showing that violations of the CHSH and CH inequality can occur in human conceptual combination.

Quantum-like non-separability of concept combinations, emergent associates and abduction

Consider the concept combination ‘pet human’. In word association experiments, human subjects produce the associate ‘slave’ in relation to this combination. The striking aspect of this associate is that it is not produced as an associate of ‘pet’, or ‘human’ in isolation. In other words, the associate ‘slave’ seems to be emergent. Such emergent associations sometimes have a creative character and cognitive science is largely silent about how we produce them. Departing from a dimensional model of human conceptual space, this article will explore concept combinations, and will argue that emergent associations are a result of abductive reasoning within conceptual space, that is, below the symbolic level of cognition. A tensor-based approach is used to model concept combinations allowing such combinations to be formalized as interacting quantum systems. Free association norm data is used to motivate the underlying basis of the conceptual space. It is shown by analogy how some concept combinations may behave like quantum-entangled (non-separable) particles. Two methods of analysis were presented for empirically validating the presence of non-separable concept combinations in human cognition. One method is based on quantum theory and another based on comparing a joint (true theoretic) probability distribution with another distribution based on a separability assumption using a chi-square goodness-of-fit test. Although these methods were inconclusive in relation to an empirical study of bi-ambiguous concept combinations, avenues for further refinement of these methods are identified.

Tests and Models of Non-compositional Concepts

The question of under what conditions conceptual representation is compositional remains debatable within cognitive science. This paper proposes a well developed mathematical apparatus for a probabilistic representation of concepts, drawing upon methods developed in quantum theory to propose a formal test that can determine whether a specific conceptual combination is compositional, or not. This test examines a joint probability distribution modeling the combination, asking whether or not it is factorizable. Empirical studies indicate that some combinations should be considered non-compositionally.

Theorizing the use of multiple conceptual models in combination

Conceptual modelling continues to be an important means for graphically capturing the requirements of an information system. Observations of modelling practice suggest that modellers often use multiple conceptual models in combination, because they articulate different aspects of real-world domains. Yet, the available empirical as well as theoretical research in this area has largely studied the use of single models, or single modelling grammars. We develop a Theory of Combined Ontological Coverage by extending an existing theory of ontological expressiveness of conceptual modelling grammars. Our new theory posits that multiple conceptual models are used to increase the maximum coverage of the real-world domain being modelled, whilst trying to minimize the ontological overlap between the models. We illustrate how the theory can be applied to analyse sets of conceptual models. We develop three propositions of the theory about evaluations of model combinations in terms of users’ selection, understandability and usefulness of conceptual models.

Expectations, obligations or promises? A conceptual review and revision of the beliefs comprising the psychological contract

The psychological contract is a frequently deployed construct to examine the dynamics of the employee-employer exchange relationship. While there is consensus that the contract comprises employee and employer beliefs regarding this relationship, the various belief types are not conceptually well-defined and understood. Over time, the contract has been conceptualised as comprising expectations, obligations, promises or some combination therein. While most contemporary researchers focus solely upon promises, the justifications for this position are unpersuasive. This paper theoretically describes the various belief types, identifies their interrelationships and proposes a reconceptualisation of the beliefs constituting the contract. Specifically, it is demonstrated that the extant promise-based belief framework provides too restrictive a theoretical base for a comprehensive understanding of individuals’ psychological contracts.

A conceptual decision-making framework for the delivery of innovative change in organisations

Research found that today’s organisations are increasingly aware of the potential barriers and perceived challenges associated with the successful delivery of change — including cultural and sub-cultural indifferences; financial constraints; restricted timelines; insufficient senior management support; fragmented key stakeholder commitment; and inadequate training. The delivery and application of Innovative Change (see glossary) within a construction industry organisation tends to require a certain level of ‘readiness’. This readiness is the combination of an organisation’s ability to part from undertakings that may be old, traditional, or inefficient; and then being able to readily adopt a procedure or initiative which is new, improved, or more efficient. Despite the construction industry’s awareness of the various threats and opportunities associated with the delivery of change, research found little attention is currently given to develop a ‘decision-making framework’ that comprises measurable elements (dynamics) that may assist in more accurately determining an organisation’s level of readiness or ability to deliver innovative change. To resolve this, an initial Background Literature Review in 2004 identified six such dynamics, those of Change, Innovation, Implementation, Culture, Leadership, and Training and Education, which were then hypothesised to be key components of a ‘Conceptual Decision-making Framework’ (CDF) for delivering innovative change within an organisation. To support this hypothesis, a second (more extensive) Literature Review was undertaken from late 2007 to mid 2009. A Delphi study was embarked on in June 2008, inviting fifteen building and construction industry members to form a panel and take part in a Delphi study. The selection criterion required panel members to have senior positions (manager and above) within a recognised field or occupation, and to have experience, understanding and / or knowledge in the process of delivering change within organisations. The final panel comprised nine representatives from private and public industry organisations and tertiary / research and development (R&D) universities. The Delphi study developed, distributed and collated two rounds of survey questionnaires over a four-month period, comprising open-ended and closed questions (referred to as factors). The first round of Delphi survey questionnaires were distributed to the panel in August 2008, asking them to rate the relevancy of the six hypothesised dynamics. In early September 2008, round-one responses were returned, analysed and documented. From this, an additional three dynamics were identified and confirmed by the panel as being highly relevant during the decision-making process when delivering innovative change within an organisation. The additional dynamics (‘Knowledge-sharing and Management’; ‘Business Process Requirements’; and ‘Life-cycle Costs’) were then added to the first six dynamics and used to populate the second (final) Delphi survey questionnaire. This was distributed to the same nine panel members in October 2008, this time asking them to rate the relevancy of all nine dynamics. In November 2008, round-two responses were returned, analysed, summarised and documented. Final results confirmed stability in responses and met Delphi study guidelines. The final contribution is twofold. Firstly, findings confirm all nine dynamics as key components of the proposed CDF for delivering innovative change within an organisation. Secondly, the future development and testing of an ‘Innovative Change Delivery Process’ (ICDP) is proposed, one that is underpinned by an ‘Innovative Change Decision-making Framework’ (ICDF), an ‘Innovative Change Delivery Analysis’ (ICDA) program, and an ‘Innovative Change Delivery Guide’ (ICDG).

Paper-based mixed reality sketch augmentation as a conceptual design support tool

This undergraduate student paper explores usage of mixed reality techniques as support tools for conceptual design. A proof-of-concept was developed to illustrate this principle. Using this as an example, a small group of designers was interviewed to determine their views on the use of this technology. These interviews are the main contribution of this paper. Several interesting applications were determined, suggesting possible usage in a wide range of domains. Paper-based sketching, mixed reality and sketch augmentation techniques complement each other, and the combination results in a highly intuitive interface.