Conceptual Spaces for Cognitive Architectures: A Lingua Franca for Different Levels of Representation

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
During the last decades, many cognitive architectures (CAs) have been realized adopting different assumptions about the organization and the representation of their knowledge level. Some of them (e.g. SOAR [35]) adopt a classical symbolic approach, some (e.g. LEABRA[ 48]) are based on a purely connectionist model, while others (e.g. CLARION [59]) adopt a hybrid approach combining connectionist and symbolic representational levels. Additionally, some attempts (e.g. biSOAR) trying to extend the representational capacities of CAs by integrating diagrammatical representations and reasoning are also available [34]. In this paper we propose a reflection on the role that Conceptual Spaces, a framework developed by Peter G¨ardenfors [24] more than fifteen years ago, can play in the current development of the Knowledge Level in Cognitive Systems and Architectures. In particular, we claim that Conceptual Spaces offer a lingua franca that allows to unify and generalize many aspects of the symbolic, sub-symbolic and diagrammatic approaches (by overcoming some of their typical problems) and to integrate them on a common ground. In doing so we extend and detail some of the arguments explored by G¨ardenfors [23] for defending the need of a conceptual, intermediate, representation level between the symbolic and the sub-symbolic one. In particular we focus on the advantages offered by Conceptual Spaces (w.r.t. symbolic and sub-symbolic approaches) in dealing with the problem of compositionality of representations based on typicality traits. Additionally, we argue that Conceptual Spaces could offer a unifying framework for interpreting many kinds of diagrammatic and analogical representations. As a consequence, their adoption could also favor the integration of diagrammatical representation and reasoning in CAs.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LIECSF
Revision history
First archival date: 2016-09-23
Latest version: 2 (2016-10-07)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Doing Without Concepts.Machery, Edouard
The Big Book of Concepts.Murphy, Gregory L.
An Integrated Theory of the Mind.Anderson, John R.; Bothell, Daniel; Byrne, Michael D.; Douglass, Scott; Lebiere, Christian & Qin, Yulin

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
What Are Natural Concepts? A Design Perspective.Douven, Igor & Gärdenfors, Peter
Higher-Level Knowledge, Rational and Social Levels Constraints of the Common Model of the Mind.Lieto, Antonio; Kennedy, William G.; Lebiere, Christian; Romero, Oscar; Taatgen, Niels & West, Robert

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2016-09-23

Total views
217 ( #14,402 of 40,765 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
70 ( #7,381 of 40,765 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.