MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416768278 · doi:10.1098/rsta.2024.0372

Quantum-like cognition and decision-making in the light of quantum measurement theory

2025· article· en· W4416768278 on OpenAlexaff
Miho Fuyama, Andrei Khrennikov, Masanao Ozawa

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersRIKENChubu UniversityJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceJapan Science and Technology CorporationEuropean Cooperation in Science and Technology
KeywordsClass (philosophy)QuantumObservableCognitionTheme (computing)Quantum operationQuantum probabilityQuantum process

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We characterize the class of quantum measurements that matches the applications of quantum theory to cognition (and decision-making)—quantum-like modelling. Projective measurements describe the canonical measurements of the basic observables of quantum physics. However, the combinations of the basic cognitive effects, such as the question order and response replicability effects (RREs), cannot be described by projective measurements. We motivate the use of the special class of quantum measurements, namely, sharp repeatable non-projective measurements — <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mstyle> <mml:mrow> <mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi class="mathcal" mathvariant="script">S</mml:mi> <mml:mi class="mathcal" mathvariant="script">R</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mover> <mml:mi class="mathcal" mathvariant="script">P</mml:mi> <mml:mo class="mathcal" mathvariant="script" stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo> </mml:mover> </mml:mrow> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo>.</mml:mo> </mml:mstyle> </mml:mrow> </mml:mstyle> </mml:math> This class is practically unused in quantum physics. Thus, physics and cognition explore different parts of quantum measurement theory. Quantum-like modelling is not the automatic borrowing of the quantum formalism. Exploring the class <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mstyle> <mml:mrow> <mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi class="mathcal" mathvariant="script">S</mml:mi> <mml:mi class="mathcal" mathvariant="script">R</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mover> <mml:mi class="mathcal" mathvariant="script">P</mml:mi> <mml:mo class="mathcal" mathvariant="script" stretchy="false">¯</mml:mo> </mml:mover> </mml:mrow> </mml:mrow> </mml:mstyle> </mml:mrow> </mml:mstyle> </mml:math> highlights the role of non-commutativity of the state-update maps generated by measurement back action . Thus, ‘non-classicality’ in quantum physics as well as quantum-like modelling for cognition is based on two different types of non-commutativity, of operators (observables) and instruments (state-update maps): observable non-commutativity versus state-update-non-commutativity . We speculate that distinguishing quantum-like properties of the cognitive effects is the expression of the latter, or possibly both. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Quantum theory and topology in models of decision making (Part 1)’.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering SciencesSame topicQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207