"Working Memory"

[Wayne Gray]

At 13:35 -0500 11/26/96, Christian Schunn wrote:
>I agree with Wayne that Soar did make a mistake in using the word
>'chunk'---their notion of chunk has almost nothing to do with the
>historical, psychological sense of the word. However, I don't think we
>should generalize to the conclusion that no architecture should use the
>word 'chunk'. While the declarative memory element in ACT-R may have
>some subtle differences from the general meaning of chunk, it is very
>close in meaning:
>
>-Chunks refer to declarative knowledge stored in long-term memory
>-Chunks are built up through experience
>-Chunks have direct implications for memory span and retrieval times
>

Maybe . . . but perhaps the view from CMU is different than that of the
rest of the world. So, for example, what would a non-cognitive modeler call
a learned part of a procedure? I would call it a production and assign it
to the act-r category of "procedure memory." Someone with a different
bias/background (and there are a few of these in cognitive psychology)
might want to call it a "chunk."

So, for a non-modeler, would any of Chris' three points apply JUST to act-r
declarative memory elements and not to act-r procedures?

Perhaps we should follow Dave Klahr's suggestion and go with clod, or
something.


#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=
Wayne D. Gray
Human Factors & Applied Cognitive Program
George Mason University
m/s 3f5
Fairfax, VA  22030
Phone: +1 (703) 993-1357
http://web.gmu.edu/departments/psychology/Wgray.html

Work is infinite, time is finite, plan accordingly.
#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=