Explicit learning in ACT-R

A popular distinction in the learning literature is the distinction between implicit and explicit learning. Although many studies elaborate on the nature of implicit learning, little attention is left for explicit learning. The unintentional aspect of implicit learning corresponds well to the mechanistic view of learning employed in architectures of cognition. But how to account for deliberate, intentional, explicit learning? This chapter argues that explicit learning can be explained by strategies that exploit implicit learning mechanisms. This idea is explored and modelled using the ACT-R theory (Anderson, 1993). An explicit strategy for learning facts in ACT-R’s declarative memory is rehearsal, a strategy that uses ACT-R’s activation learning mechanisms to gain deliberate control over what is learned. In the same sense, strategies for explicit procedural learning are proposed. Procedural learning in ACT-R involves generalisation of examples. Explicit learning rules can create and manipulate these examples. An example of these explicit rules will be discussed. These rules are general enough to be able to model the learning of three different tasks. Furthermore, the last of these models can explain the difference between adults and children in the discrimination-shift task

A Rational Analysis of Alternating Search and Reflection Strategies in Problem Solving

In this paper two approaches to problem solving, search and reflection, are discussed, and combined in two models, both based on rational analysis (Anderson, 1990). The first model is a dynamic growth model, which shows that alternating search and reflection is a rational strategy. The second model is a model in ACT-R, which can discover and revise strategies to solve simple problems. Both models exhibit the explore-insight pattern normally attributed to insight problem solving

A model of learning task-specific knowledge for a new task

In this paper I will present a detailed ACT-R model of how the task-specific knowledge for a new, complex task is learned. The model is capable of acquiring its knowledge through experience, using a declarative representation that is gradually compiled into a procedural representation. The model exhibits several characteristics that concur with Fitt’s theory of skill learning, and can be used to show that individual differences in working memory capacity initially have a large impact on performance, but that this impact diminished after sufficient experience. Some preliminary experimental data support these findings

Implicit and explicit learning in ACT-R

A useful way to explain the notions of implicit and explicit learning in ACT-R is to define implicit learning as learning by ACT-R's learning mechanisms, and explicit learning as the results of learning goals. This idea complies with the usual notion of implicit learning as unconscious and always active and explicit learning as intentional and conscious. Two models will be discussed to illustrate this point. First a model of a classical implicit memory task, the SUGARFACTORY scenario by Berry & Broadbent (1984) will be discussed, to show how ACT-R can model implicit learning. The second model is of the so-called Fincham task (Anderson & Fincham, 1994), and exhibits both implicit and explicit learning

Cognitive Architectures: Innate or Learned?

Cognitive architectures are generally considered to be theo- ries of the innate capabilities of the (human) cognitive system. Any knowledge that is not innate is encoded in the architec- tures memory systems, either by the modeler or learned by the architecture itself. However, in human intelligent behav- ior few things are innate. An alternative is to acknowledge that learning occurs at different levels of abstraction. A stan- dard model of the mind should therefore span multiple levels of abstraction, encouraging research efforts to establish learn- ing mechanism that connect them

Cognitive Architectures: Innate or Learned?

Cognitive architectures are generally considered to be theo- ries of the innate capabilities of the (human) cognitive system. Any knowledge that is not innate is encoded in the architec- tures memory systems, either by the modeler or learned by the architecture itself. However, in human intelligent behav- ior few things are innate. An alternative is to acknowledge that learning occurs at different levels of abstraction. A stan- dard model of the mind should therefore span multiple levels of abstraction, encouraging research efforts to establish learn- ing mechanism that connect them

Higher-level Knowledge, Rational and Social Levels Constraints of the Common Model of the Mind

In his famous 1982 paper, Allen Newell [22, 23] introduced the notion of knowledge level to indicate a level of analysis, and prediction, of the rational behavior of a cognitive articial agent. This analysis concerns the investigation about the availability of the agent knowledge, in order to pursue its own goals, and is based on the so-called Rationality Principle (an assumption according to which "an agent will use the knowledge it has of its environment to achieve its goals" [22, p. 17]. By using the Newell's own words: "To treat a system at the knowledge level is to treat it as having some knowledge, some goals, and believing it will do whatever is within its power to attain its goals, in so far as its knowledge indicates" [22, p. 13]. In the last decades, the importance of the knowledge level has been historically and system- atically downsized by the research area in cognitive architectures (CAs), whose interests have been mainly focused on the analysis and the development of mechanisms and the processes governing human and (articial) cognition. The knowledge level in CAs, however, represents a crucial level of analysis for the development of such articial general systems and therefore deserves greater research attention [17]. In the following, we will discuss areas of broad agree- ment and outline the main problematic aspects that should be faced within a Common Model of Cognition [12]. Such aspects, departing from an analysis at the knowledge level, also clearly impact both lower (e.g. representational) and higher (e.g. social) levels