SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Kevin Gluck

Publications and source records attributed to Kevin Gluck.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Zenons Demon and the Denial of Domain-Generality for Transformer-Based Computational Models of Human Behavior

Transformer-based models of human behavior (e.g., the Centaur model by Binz, et al., 2025) posit to be domain general computational models of human behavior. The claim of domain-generality is by virtue of the supposed capability to predict and simulate human behavior across a vast range of cognitive and perceptual domains. Further, it is argued that this degree of performance places such models on a path toward general, unified theories of cognition (Newell, 1990). We contest this characterization. We propose the Domain-Generality Thesis: A computational model is domain-general if and only if it performs well across a structurally distinct set of tasks. While transformer-based models of human behavior achieve impressive statistical breadth, we demonstrate that, by example, they fail this structural criterion, conflating parametric variations of a single task with genuine cognitive diversity. We construct an argument that denies the domain-generality of transformer-based models of human behavior and thus denies the purported status as a start on the path towards general, unified theories of cognition.

q-bio.NC

Not Even Wrong: On the Limits of Prediction as Explanation in Cognitive Science

We offer a comment on the Centaur (Binz et al., 2025) transformer-based model of human behavior. In particular, Centaur was cast as a path towards unified theories of cognition. We offer a counter claim with supporting argument: Centaur is a path divergent from unified theories of cognition, one that moves towards a unified model of behavior sans cognition.

q-bio.NC

Fitting, Evaluating, and Comparing Cognitive Architecture Models Using Likelihood: A Primer With Examples in ACT-R

Cognitive architectures are influential, integrated computational frameworks for modeling cognitive processes. Due to a variety of factors, however, researchers using cognitive architectures to explain and predict human performance rarely employ model validation, comparison, and selection techniques based on likelihood. This paper provides a primer on how to implement maximum likelihood techniques and its derivatives to fit and compare models at the individual and group level, using models implemented in the ACT-R cognitive architecture as examples. The paper covers the most common ways in which likelihood measures can be applied, under different scenarios, for models of different complexity, and provides further technical references for the interested reader. An accompanying notebook in Python provides the code to implement all of the suggestions.

q-bio.NC