Reflections on dynamics,adaptation and control: A cognitive architecture for mental models

In this paper, an overview of the wide variety of occurrences of mental models in the literature is discussed. They are classified according to two dimensions obtaining four categories of them: static-dynamic and world-mental, where static refers to mental models for static world states or for static mental states and dynamic refers to mental models for world processes or for mental processes. In addition, distinctions are made for what can be done by mental models: they can, for example, be (1) used for internal simulation, they can be (2) adapted, and these processes can be (3) controlled. This leads to a global three-level cognitive architecture covering these three ways of handling mental models. It is discussed that in this cognitive architecture reflection principles play an important role to define the interactions between the different levels.     

Set as an Instance of a Real‐World Visual‐Cognitive Task

Complex problem solving is often an integration of perceptual processing and deliberate planning. But what balances these two processes, and how do novices differ from experts? We investigate the interplay between these two in the game of SET. This article investigates how people combine bottom‐up visual processes and top‐down planning to succeed in this game. Using combinatorial and mixed‐effect regression analysis of eye‐movement protocols and a cognitive model of a human player, we show that SET players deploy both bottom‐up and top‐down processes in parallel to accomplish the same task. The combination of competition and cooperation of both types of processes is a major factor of success in the game. Finally, we explore strategies players use during the game. Our findings suggest that within‐trial strategy shifts can occur without the need of explicit meta‐cognitive control, but rather implicitly as a result of evolving memory activations.     

Drivers’ engagement level in Adaptive Cruise Control while distracted or impaired

Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) is designed for convenience to maintain a set speed and specified distance from a lead vehicle. However, use of ACC may change driving patterns and perceptions over time. Many drivers perceive safety benefits associated with ACC even though the safety implications are not always clear. This study examined the factors that can influence the frequency of ACC use with surveys distributed to ACC owners in Washington State. A cluster analysis was conducted to group drivers based on how often they activated and used ACC under various driving scenarios. Four clusters emerged that showed a range of use from those who rarely used ACC in any situation (low engagement group) to those who used it for almost all situations regardless of whether it is appropriate or not (high engagement group). An ordered logit model was used to predict the likelihood of being in one of the four clusters. Drivers that were less likely to use ACC in distracting or impaired situations tend to be older, were not willing to re-purchase a similar vehicle with ACC, and were generally confused on how to use the cruise speed setting. Drivers who reported higher overall use of ACC also used the system in situations that can be considered distracting or risky, which can negate the overall benefits of ACC.