From rsun at cecs.missouri.edu Fri Nov 1 15:42:04 2002 From: rsun at cecs.missouri.edu (rsun at cecs.missouri.edu) Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 14:42:04 -0600 Subject: [ACT-R-users] new issues of Cognitive Systems Research Message-ID: <200211012042.gA1Kg4a21256@ari1.cecs.missouri.edu> New issues are now available COGNITIVE SYSTEMS RESEARCH Volume 3, Issue 3, Pages 271-554, 2002 =============================================================================== Cognitive Systems Research Volume 3, Issue 3, Pages 271-554 a special issue on situated and embodied cognition edited by Tom Ziemke TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction to the special issue on situated and embodied cognition, Pages 271-274 Tom Ziemke http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-46XHBH0-1/1/3fb9b1689e5f826bcf849a75afcff513 Representation in dynamical and embodied cognition, Pages 275-288 Fred Keijzer http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45H92WR-1/1/7418aabb151835c54aea8d6c8497409c An ecological approach to embodiment and cognition, Pages 289-299 Naoya Hirose http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45HWNG0-1/1/29d27bf1b77832a1191b11c2a4613f0c Semantics, experience and time, Pages 301-337 Stephen E. Robbins http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45M6B2X-1/1/98a589eed632a2f7fa5f959113d1690f When is a cognitive system embodied?, Pages 339-348 Alexander Riegler http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45HFF6Y-2/1/84e99cabef651e9032acc4aaa8056d8b Cognitive task transformations, Pages 349-359 David de Leon http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45HFF6Y-3/1/140319f8b44cb3969aa2b4abd87b6d92 Operationalizing situated cognition and learning, Pages 361-383 Steven M. Kemp http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45KSPCF-1/1/24a1f6377884f0f873a94a99c7eff961 Interfaces of social psychology with situated and embodied cognition, Pages 385-396 Gun R. Semin and Eliot R. Smith http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45H92WR-2/1/cdbdedfa258d6af8f17c982f8fdba684 >From embodied to socially embedded agents - Implications for interaction-aware robots, Pages 397-428 Kerstin Dautenhahn, Bernard Ogden and Tom Quick http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45JGW5T-1/1/4ebe8ecc97061de118607f87cbd9916c The physical symbol grounding problem, Pages 429-457 Paul Vogt http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45JY928-2/1/9f933ec9575e320bd3e5df298a18f312 On the dynamics of robot exploration learning, Pages 459-470 Jun Tani and Jun Yamamoto http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45NPDR9-1/1/30232225aeb29ea6f7daea13ed03ffa1 Simulating activities: Relating motives, deliberation, and attentive coordination, Pages 471-499 William J. Clancey http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45JY928-1/1/a63c8d94790efa33f82067ac161aad88 Activity organization and knowledge construction during competitive interaction in table tennis, Pages 501-522 Carole Seve, Jacques Saury, Jacques Theureau and Marc Durand http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45KSPCF-2/1/92cbefc3162526340a56011455284bbe Situatedness in translation studies, Pages 523-533 Hanna Risku http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45HFF6Y-1/1/f294067d693ab4a387717992ba06dbc0 >From action to discourse: The bridging function of gestures, Pages 535-554 Wolff-Michael Roth http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W6C-45HWNG0-2/1/ead6e8b30a4465db2274827f692086ad =============================================================================== If you have questions about ScienceDirect, please locate your nearest Help Desk at http://www.info.sciencedirect.com/contacts. =============================================================================== See the following journal Web pages for subscription information for the journal Cognitive Systems Research: http://www.cecs.missouri.edu/~rsun/journal.html http://www.elsevier.com/locate/cogsys =================================================================== Professor Ron Sun, Ph.D CECS Department, 201 EBW phone: (573) 884-7662 University of Missouri-Columbia fax: (573) 882 8318 Columbia, MO 65211-2060 email: rsun at cecs.missouri.edu http://www.cecs.missouri.edu/~rsun =================================================================== From grayw at rpi.edu Sun Nov 3 20:19:27 2002 From: grayw at rpi.edu (Wayne Gray) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 20:19:27 -0500 Subject: [ACT-R-users] job opening Message-ID: The Cognitive Science Department of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute anticipates one or more openings beginning in Fall 2003, rank open. We are seeking candidates who have a Ph.D. in Cognitive Science or one of its contributing disciplines (i.e., AI/Computer Science, Psychology, Education/Educational Technology, Philosophy/Logic, or Linguistics). The Cognitive Science Department at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute specializes in four areas: Machine & Human Reasoning, Computational Cognitive Modeling, Cognitive Engineering, and Perception & Action. The ideal candidate will bridge two of these areas or one of these and a supporting area (e.g., AI/Natural Language Processing, Educational Psychology/Technology, and Cognitive Neuroscience. Joint appointments with the Department of Computer Science, and/or the Department of Decision Sciences and Engineering Systems, are possible. A record of (or strong potential for) external funding is expected, and evidence of teaching skills and multi-disciplinary interests is highly desirable. Rank, again, is open. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, the oldest technological university in the U.S., is located in historic Troy NY, in the Hudson River Valley, approximately 5 miles N of Albany, NY. It is 3-hrs south of Montreal, 2.5-hrs west of Boston, and 2-hrs north of New York City, to which Amtrak runs on high-speed track that should soon shorten the trip even further. The Albany area is notable for many things, including its affordable housing, cultural events (e.g., the famed Saratoga Performing Arts Center), and proximity to outdoor recreation (e.g., hiking/skiing in the Adirondack, White, Green, and Berkshire Mountains). The Cognitive Science Department is a new department that anticipates taking its first class of doctoral students in the Fall of 2003. Department faculty have excellent ties with faculty in the human-computer interaction program, decision sciences, and computer science. Labs that bridge department boundaries encourage these ties. Applications will be evaluated starting on December 1, 2002, and will continue until a suitable candidate is found. A vita, three letters of recommendation, a brief statement of research and teaching interests, and copies of relevant preprints/reprints should be sent to: Cognitive Search Committee, c/o Wayne Gray - Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 110 8th Street, Troy, New York 12180-3590 -- **Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer** Wayne D. Gray; Professor of Cognitive Science Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Carnegie Building (rm 108) ;;for deliveries 110 8th St.; Troy, NY 12180 EMAIL: grayw at rpi.edu, Cell: 518-364-9114, Lab: 518-276-6067, Fax: 518-276-8268 for general information see: http://www.rpi.edu/~grayw/ for On-Line publications see: http://www.rpi.edu/~grayw/pubs/downloadable_pubs.htm Work is infinite, time is finite, plan accordingly. **Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer** From rsun at cecs.missouri.edu Fri Nov 8 10:47:39 2002 From: rsun at cecs.missouri.edu (rsun at cecs.missouri.edu) Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 09:47:39 -0600 Subject: [ACT-R-users] Workshop on cognitive modeling of agents and multi-agent interactions Message-ID: <200211081547.gA8Fld711471@ari1.cecs.missouri.edu> Workshop on Cognitive Modeling of Agents and Multi-Agent Interactions During IJCAI'2003 9-11 August, 2003. Acapulco, Mexico Computational models of cognitive agents that incorporate a wide range of cognitive functionalities (such as a variety of memory/representation, various types of learning, and sensory motor capabilities) have been developed in both AI and cognitive science. In AI, they appear under the rubric of intelligent agents and multi-agent systems. In cognitive science, they are often known as cognitive architectures. These strands of research provide useful paradigms for addressing some fundamental questions in AI and Cognitive Science. Artificial intelligence started out with the goal of designing functioning intelligent agents. However, faced with the enormous difficulty of the task, the focus has largely been on modeling specific aspects of intelligence, often in highly restricted domains. Nevertheless, some researchers have focused on putting the pieces together with the goal of designing autonomous agents. More important, there is a growing interest in multi-agent interactions that addresses issues of coordination and cooperation among cognitive agents. On the other side, traditionally, the main focus of research in cognitive science has been on specific components of cognition (e.g., perception, memory, learning, language). Recent developments in computational modeling of cognitive architectures provide new avenues for precisely specifying complex cognitive processes in tangible ways, thereby addressing foundational questions in cognitive science. Such developments need to be extended to multi-agent interactions and there are promising developments in this regard (see e.g. recent papers in this area in the journal Cognitive Systems Research). Against this background, this workshop seeks to bring together cognitive scientists and AI researchers, with a wide range of background and expertise, to discuss research problems in understanding cognition at the individual level as well as at the collective level. The workshop is open to all members of the AI and CogSci research communities. We invite submissions on all aspects of cognitive modeling of agents and multi-agent interactions, including, but not limited to: * Cognitive architectures of individual cognitive agents. * Cognitive models of multi-agent interactions (e.g., communication, cooperation, and negotiation, in relation to cognition). * Cognitive models of multi-agent organizations (e.g., organizational structure, economies, culture, and other coordination structures and mechanisms, in relation to cognition). * Cognitive models of co-learning of multiple cognitive agents. * Computational models of evolution of cognition and behavior. * Computational abstractions, languages, and tools for cognitive modeling of agents and multi-agent interactions. The discussions at the workshop will focus on the following issues, among many others: * What are the characteristics of the successful cognitive architectures for modeling individual cognitive agents? * What are the suitable characteristics of cognitive architectures for modeling both individual cognitive agents and multi-agent interactions? * What are the fundamental ways of understanding and modeling multi-agent interactions? Can they be reduced to individual cognition? * How can we best characterize and model social structures and organizations in relation to cognition? * How important is evolution in shaping individual cognition and collective behavior? How can we model that aspect? SUBMISSION If you are interested in giving a presentation at the workshop, please submit a full paper, 6-10 pages, in the IJCAI paper format. If you are only interested in attending, submit a brief abstract (one page or less) describing your interest. Use the IJCAI paper format (and templates) for your papers. See the IJCAI Web site: http://www.ijcai-03.org for details. Electronic submission is required. Only the Postscript or PDF format is accepted. Send your paper (in PS or PDF) as an email attachment. In the body of your email, include (in plain ASCII): names of all authors, their affiliations, their physical addresses, and their email addresses. In addition, the same information should also be included in your paper itself. All submissions should be sent to: rsun at cecs.missouri.edu Each paper will be reviewed for technical soundness, relevance, significance, and clarity. An edited book volume, as well as a special issue of the journal Cognitive System Research, is planned for a selected subset of the papers of the workshop. IMPORTANT DATES AND DEADLINES * Deadline for the submission of full papers (6 to 10 pages) or abstracts (1 page): March 1, 2003. * Notification of acceptance/rejection: March 30, 2003. * Deadline for the receipt of camera-ready papers: May 1, 2003 ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Prof. Ron Sun (Chair) CECS Department, 201 EBW University of Missouri-Columbia Columbia, MO 65211-2060 rsun at cecs.missouri.edu http://www.cecs.missouri.edu/~rsun Prof. Cristiano Castelfranchi Department of Communication Sciences University of Siena Siena, Italy castel at ip.rm.cnr.it Prof. Jan Treur Department of Artificial Intelligence Faculty of Sciences Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam 1081 HV Amsterdam, Netherlands treur at cs.vu.nl Dr. Robert L. West Department of Psychology and Department of Cognitive Science Carleton University 1125 Colonel By Drive Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6 robert_west at carleton.ca Dr. Christian Lebiere Human-Computer Interaction Institute School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 cl at andrew.cmu.edu ------------------------------------------------------------ See the workshop Web page at: http://www.cecs.missouri.edu/~rsun/wsp03.html =================================================================== Professor Ron Sun, Ph.D CECS Department, 201 EBW phone: (573) 884-7662 University of Missouri-Columbia fax: (573) 882 8318 Columbia, MO 65211-2060 email: rsun at cecs.missouri.edu http://www.cecs.missouri.edu/~rsun =================================================================== From dhuss at rice.edu Tue Nov 12 17:44:41 2002 From: dhuss at rice.edu (Dave Huss) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 16:44:41 -0600 Subject: [ACT-R-users] UDP Message-ID: <54DF2006-F690-11D6-B928-000393A8FBBC@rice.edu> For a model we need to get it to interact with a foreign program using UDP. I need to figure this out and am more than a little lost. Does anyone out there have experience with UDP and Lisp/ACT-R and could offer some tips/sample code? Thanks Dave Huss CHIL at Rice University dhuss at rice.edu From byrne at rice.edu Wed Nov 13 15:31:21 2002 From: byrne at rice.edu (Mike Byrne) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 14:31:21 -0600 Subject: [ACT-R-users] RPM in MCL 5.0b and OS X Message-ID: For those of you who are trying to run RPM under MCL 5.0b on OS X: Apple's Carbon interfaces don't directly support pushing the mouse around the same way as things worked under OS 9. Thus, your code will bomb under MCL 5.0b and OS X because it will attempt to shove the cursor around, and that will fail. The solution is to use the "virtual" cursor, available as osx-virtual-cursor.lisp, which you can find here: http://chil.rice.edu/projects/RPM/Downloads/osx-virtual-cursor.lisp This draws a little green cursor on MCL windows but does not affect the real cursor. So far in testing, this works well--standard buttons and other clickable views respect it correctly. There are two caveats: If you use MOUSE-ENTER events, this doesn't generate them. This requires that the window RPM is interacting with be the front window when clicks are processed. To guarantee this, RPM selects the window before clicking, so if you're working in another window it will lose focus when the model clicks. So far I have not found a way around this. Email me if you have questions about this, -Mike =========================================================== Mike Byrne, Ph.D. byrne at acm.org Assistant Professor, Psychology Department Rice University, MS-25 http://chil.rice.edu/byrne/ 6100 Main Street +1 713-348-3770 voice Houston, TX 77005-1892 +1 713-348-5221 fax From awinkler at maad.com Thu Nov 14 15:07:37 2002 From: awinkler at maad.com (Anna Fowles-Winkler) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 13:07:37 -0700 Subject: [ACT-R-users] Installation Question: Allegro Common Lisp vs. Emacs Lisp Message-ID: <3DD40289.5070700@maad.com> Hi, I'm trying to install ACT-R on a RedHat Linux 7.2 computer. I was wondering if I can use the Lisp environment that comes with Emacs? I tried to load the "+ load-rpm.lisp" file in Emacs, and I get this error: Symbol's function definition is void: in-package Thanks, Anna awinkler at maad.com From agoode at andrew.cmu.edu Thu Nov 14 16:54:23 2002 From: agoode at andrew.cmu.edu (Adam Goode) Date: 14 Nov 2002 16:54:23 -0500 Subject: [ACT-R-users] Installation Question: Allegro Common Lisp vs. Emacs Lisp In-Reply-To: <3DD40289.5070700@maad.com> References: <3DD40289.5070700@maad.com> Message-ID: <1037310863.13804.127.camel@krzysztof.psy.cmu.edu> The problem is that Emacs Lisp is not Common Lisp. On RedHat, you can probably use clisp or cmucl. If you are running the New Environment, then clisp will not work. Allegro or Lispworks should always work fine. Adam On Thu, 2002-11-14 at 15:07, Anna Fowles-Winkler wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to install ACT-R on a RedHat Linux 7.2 computer. I was > wondering if I can use the Lisp environment that comes with Emacs? I > tried to load the "+ load-rpm.lisp" file in Emacs, and I get this error: > Symbol's function definition is void: in-package > > Thanks, > Anna > awinkler at maad.com > > > _______________________________________________ > ACT-R-users mailing list > ACT-R-users at act-r.psy.cmu.edu > http://act-r.psy.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/act-r-users -- From ritter at ist.psu.edu Thu Nov 14 18:36:24 2002 From: ritter at ist.psu.edu (Frank E. Ritter) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 18:36:24 -0500 Subject: [ACT-R-users] Installation Question: Allegro Common Lisp vs. Emacs Lisp In-Reply-To: <3DD40289.5070700@maad.com> References: <3DD40289.5070700@maad.com> Message-ID: the lisp that comes with Emacs is Emacs lisp. In a wide variety of ways, all essentially uninteresting theoretically. you could rewrite ACT-R to run in emacs lisp, but you are much better served installing a more typical lisp for act-r. the act-r distribution notes may have comments on which lisp, as well as the faq has some suggestions for this, http://acs.ist.psu.edu/act-r-faq. Cheers, Frank At 13:07 -0700 14/11/02, Anna Fowles-Winkler wrote: >Hi, > >I'm trying to install ACT-R on a RedHat Linux 7.2 computer. I was >wondering if I can use the Lisp environment that comes with Emacs? >I tried to load the "+ load-rpm.lisp" file in Emacs, and I get this >error: >Symbol's function definition is void: in-package > >Thanks, >Anna >awinkler at maad.com > > >_______________________________________________ >ACT-R-users mailing list >ACT-R-users at act-r.psy.cmu.edu >http://act-r.psy.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/act-r-users From grayw at rpi.edu Fri Nov 22 08:59:20 2002 From: grayw at rpi.edu (Wayne Gray) Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 08:59:20 -0500 Subject: [ACT-R-users] News from ICCM 2003 preparation, #1 Message-ID: (Apologies for cross-postings) Fifth International Conference on Cognitive Modeling (ICCM 2003) ________________________________________________________________ News from ICCM 2003 preparation _______________________________ Preparation of the conference is in good progress und we expect to have fruitful and exciting discussions with researchers from the whole range of modeling approaches. The local organizing team invites you to participate in the Fifth International Conference on Cognitive Modeling, one of the main topics in cognitive science. We would like to emphasize the role and value of posters (especially if presented together with a simulation of the related model) and thus suggest strongly that you consider this option. Posters usually have a similar structure than a research paper or journal article: an abstract, introduction (i.e., brief rationale or review of relevant research), method section, results section, and a conclusion or summary. In the typical environment of a poster session, most people are not able to read and process long sections of text. Therefore, keep text to the bare essentials, sticking to the most important ideas. You can convey details and perhaps a demonstration of the simulation model via discussion when you are standing by your poster. All queries should be directed to: ICCM 2003 Institut f?r Theoretische Psychologie Universit?t Bamberg D-96045 Bamberg Germany E-mail: iccm2003 at gmx.net The up-to-date information of the conference is available on the Website at http://iccm2003.ppp.uni-bamberg.de Important dates & deadlines - dates have changed, submission deadline has been extended. ________________________________________________________________________ Conference Thursday April 10, 2003 to Saturday April 12, 2003 Tutorials & Doctoral Consortium Wednesday April 9, 2003 Registration Now Early Registration February 15, 2003 Deadline for submissions November 30, 2002 Notification of acceptance January 31, 2003 Camera ready copy February 15, 2003 Dietrich D?rner, Harald Schaub (chairs) und Frank Detje (Host) ____________________________________ Universit?t Bamberg Institut f?r Theoretische Psychologie Kapuzinerstr. 16 D-96045 Bamberg, Germany http://www.uni-bamberg.de/ppp/insttheopsy/ -- **Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer** Wayne D. Gray; Professor of Cognitive Science Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Carnegie Building (rm 108) ;;for deliveries 110 8th St.; Troy, NY 12180 EMAIL: grayw at rpi.edu, Cell: 518-364-9114, Lab: 518-276-6067, Fax: 518-276-8268 for general information see: http://www.rpi.edu/~grayw/ for On-Line publications see: http://www.rpi.edu/~grayw/pubs/downloadable_pubs.htm Work is infinite, time is finite, plan accordingly. **Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer**Rensselaer** From Jerry.Ball at williams.af.mil Wed Nov 27 17:24:41 2002 From: Jerry.Ball at williams.af.mil (Jerry.Ball at williams.af.mil) Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 15:24:41 -0700 Subject: [ACT-R-users] Spreading Activation and Retrieval Chunks Message-ID: <245656B34A151046B0997D34FA909F0F25720B@FSQBGE06> In ACT-R 5.0, only the goal chunk spreads activation to declarative memory. This means that before a chunk can spread activation, it must become the goal chunk. Thus, if a model retrieves a chunk from declarative memory and wants to retrieve chunks associated with the retrieved chunk, the retrieved chunk must first become the goal chunk. This makes it difficult to create a model that follows associative links without putting the goal of following the associative links into the declarative chunks themselves. Given that fact that activation in ACT-R 5.0 only spreads to directly related chunks (i.e. there is no propagation beyond directly related chunks), allowing activation to spread from the retrieval chunk as well as the goal chunk would provide a secondary mechanism for spreading activation and would eliminate the serial bottleneck of having to push retrieval chunks into the goal buffer (which takes at least 1 production just to shuffle chunks around) to follow associative links. Jerry From ritter at ist.psu.edu Fri Nov 29 11:36:52 2002 From: ritter at ist.psu.edu (Frank E. Ritter) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 11:36:52 -0500 Subject: [ACT-R-users] Spreading Activation and Retrieval Chunks In-Reply-To: <245656B34A151046B0997D34FA909F0F25720B@FSQBGE06> References: <245656B34A151046B0997D34FA909F0F25720B@FSQBGE06> Message-ID: At 15:24 -0700 27/11/02, Jerry.Ball at williams.af.mil wrote: >In ACT-R 5.0, only the goal chunk spreads activation to declarative memory. >This means that before a chunk can spread activation, it must become the >goal chunk. Thus, if a model retrieves a chunk from declarative memory and >wants to retrieve chunks associated with the retrieved chunk, the retrieved >chunk must first become the goal chunk. This makes it difficult to create a >model that follows associative links without putting the goal of following >the associative links into the declarative chunks themselves. > >Given that fact that activation in ACT-R 5.0 only spreads to directly >related chunks (i.e. there is no propagation beyond directly related >chunks), allowing activation to spread from the retrieval chunk as well as >the goal chunk would provide a secondary mechanism for spreading activation >and would eliminate the serial bottleneck of having to push retrieval chunks >into the goal buffer (which takes at least 1 production just to shuffle >chunks around) to follow associative links. couldn't you make the retrieval chunk part of the goal chunk, and get some, albeit, a lighter activation propogation? Cheers, Frank From bruno.emond at nrc-cnrc.gc.ca Fri Nov 29 16:27:19 2002 From: bruno.emond at nrc-cnrc.gc.ca (Bruno Emond) Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 16:27:19 -0500 Subject: [ACT-R-users] puzzled by act-r 5.0.6 behavior Message-ID: <571EA57E-03E1-11D7-975A-00039357BF32@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> I am puzzled by a retrieval behavior in ACT-R 5. It seems that there is a range of activation values for which neither a chunk nor the failure chunked are retrieved. I have included an annotated trace as well as the sample code that generates the behavior. The code is meaningless as a model. It s intention is to reproduce the behavior. Bruno - TRACE /* This first section shows what I am anticipating: the failure chunk is retrieved because the activation is below the threshold (10). */ Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 4.999 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 4.999 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK failure Activation 10.000 Latency 0.000 Time 0.050: Ret Fired Time 0.050: Ret Selected Time 0.050: Failure Retrieved ==> Failure Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 4.375 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 4.375 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK failure Activation 10.000 Latency 0.000 Time 0.100: Ret Fired Time 0.100: Ret Selected Time 0.100: Failure Retrieved ==> Failure Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 4.010 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 4.010 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK failure Activation 10.000 Latency 0.000 Time 0.150: Ret Fired Time 0.150: Ret Selected Time 0.150: Failure Retrieved ==> Failure Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 3.751 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 3.751 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK failure Activation 10.000 Latency 0.000 Time 0.200: Ret Fired Time 0.200: Ret Selected Time 0.200: Failure Retrieved ==> Failure /* This first section shows what I am anticipating: a chunk is retrieved because the activation level is grater than the threshold (2). It goes from 4.999 to 3.021 without any problems. */ Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 4.999 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 4.999 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK X2 Activation 4.999 Latency 0.007 Time 0.050: Ret Fired Time 0.050: Ret Selected Time 0.057: X2 Retrieved ==> X2 Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 4.375 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 4.375 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK X2 Activation 4.375 Latency 0.013 Time 0.100: Ret Fired Time 0.100: Ret Selected Time 0.113: X2 Retrieved ==> X2 ... Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 3.021 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 3.021 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK X2 Activation 3.021 Latency 0.049 Time 0.450: Ret Fired Time 0.450: Ret Selected Time 0.499: X2 Retrieved ==> X2 /* Then there is the problematic section. Between an activation of 2.926 and 2.000 nil is returned, not chunk x2 or failure. Even below and activation of 2.000 nil is returned, contrary to the previous example. */ Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 2.926 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 2.926 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK X2 Activation 2.926 Latency 0.054 Time 0.500: Ret Fired Time 0.500: Ret Selected ==> NIL Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 2.841 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 2.841 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK X2 Activation 2.841 Latency 0.058 Time 0.550: Ret Fired Time 0.550: Ret Selected ==> NIL Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 2.762 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 2.762 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK X2 Activation 2.762 Latency 0.063 Time 0.600: Ret Fired Time 0.600: Ret Selected ==> NIL ... Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 2.032 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 2.032 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK X2 Activation 2.032 Latency 0.131 Time 1.350: Ret Fired Time 1.350: Ret Selected ==> NIL Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 2.000 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 2.000 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK failure Activation 2.000 Latency 0.135 Time 1.400: Ret Fired Time 1.400: Ret Selected ==> NIL Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 1.968 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 1.968 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK failure Activation 2.000 Latency 0.135 Time 1.450: Ret Fired Time 1.450: Ret Selected ==> NIL Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 1.938 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 1.938 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK failure Activation 2.000 Latency 0.135 Time 1.500: Ret Fired Time 1.500: Ret Selected ==> NIL Sources of activation are: nil Computing a base level of 1.908 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 Computing a base level of 1.908 from 1 references from creation time 0.000 CHUNK failure Activation 2.000 Latency 0.135 Time 1.550: Ret Fired Time 1.550: Ret Selected ==> NIL - Code (clearall) (sgp :esc t :bll .9 :act t :rt 2) (chunk-type c val1 val2) (chunk-type goal) (add-dm (x1 isa c val1 v1 val2 v2) (x2 isa c val1 v3 val2 v4) (g1 isa goal)) (p ret =goal> isa goal ==> +retrieval> isa c ) (goal-focus g1) (run) From db30 at andrew.cmu.edu Sat Nov 30 01:54:30 2002 From: db30 at andrew.cmu.edu (Dan Bothell) Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 01:54:30 -0500 Subject: [ACT-R-users] puzzled by act-r 5.0.6 behavior In-Reply-To: <571EA57E-03E1-11D7-975A-00039357BF32@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> Message-ID: <3534152091.1038621270@[192.168.123.126]> --On Friday, November 29, 2002 4:27 PM -0500 Bruno Emond wrote: > I am puzzled by a retrieval behavior in ACT-R 5. > It seems that there is a range of activation values for which > neither a chunk nor the failure chunked are retrieved. > What's happening is that the next production is firing before the retrieval completes, thus canceling the previous attempt. In the trace the latency displayed shows when that retrieval would complete if it wasn't canceled. So, here for instance > /* > Then there is the problematic section. Between an activation of 2.926 and > 2.000 nil is returned, not chunk x2 or failure. Even below and activation of > 2.000 nil is returned, contrary to the previous example. > */ > > Sources of activation are: nil > Computing a base level of 2.926 from 1 references from creation time > 0.000 Computing a base level of 2.926 from 1 references from creation > time 0.000 CHUNK X2 Activation 2.926 Latency 0.054 > Time 0.500: Ret Fired > Time 0.500: Ret Selected > ==> NIL > Sources of activation are: nil > Computing a base level of 2.841 from 1 references from creation time > 0.000 Computing a base level of 2.841 from 1 references from creation > time 0.000 CHUNK X2 Activation 2.841 Latency 0.058 > Time 0.550: Ret Fired > Time 0.550: Ret Selected chunk X2 will be retrieved at time .554, but the production is selected and fired again at time .550 so the retrieval doesn't get a chance to complete. Hope that clears things up, Dan From bruno.emond at nrc.ca Sat Nov 30 13:34:27 2002 From: bruno.emond at nrc.ca (Bruno Emond) Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 13:34:27 -0500 Subject: [ACT-R-users] puzzled by act-r 5.0.6 behavior In-Reply-To: <3534152091.1038621270@[192.168.123.126]> Message-ID: <5B4D799F-0492-11D7-8DC8-003065432886@nrc.ca> Dan, Thanks for the explanation. I guess this is a good example of parallel processing between modules. Now is there a way to force act-r to wait for the retrieval to be finished or do I need to add a third production (see below)? (p ret1 ??? =goal> ??? isa goal status retrieve ??? ==> ??? +retrieval> ??? isa c =goal> status retrieving ??? ) (p ret2 ??? =goal> ??? isa goal status retrieving =retrieval> ??? isa c ??? ==> ??? -goal> ??? ) (p ret3 ??? =goal> ??? isa goal status retrieving ??? ==> ??? !output! "Just waiting for my memory to catch up" ??? ) On Saturday, Nov 30, 2002, at 01:54 America/Montreal, Dan Bothell wrote: > > > --On Friday, November 29, 2002 4:27 PM -0500 Bruno Emond > wrote: > > > I am puzzled by a retrieval behavior in ACT-R 5. > > It seems that there is a range of activation values for which > > neither a chunk nor the failure chunked are retrieved. > > > > What's happening is that the next production is firing before the > retrieval > completes, thus canceling the previous attempt.? In the trace the > latency > displayed shows when that retrieval would complete if it wasn't > canceled.? So, > here for instance > > > /* > > Then there is the problematic section. Between an activation of > 2.926 and > > 2.000 nil is returned, not chunk x2 or failure. Even below and > activation of > > 2.000 nil is returned, contrary to the previous example. > > */ > > > >?? Sources of activation are: nil > >????? Computing a base level of? 2.926 from 1 references from > creation time > > 0.000????? Computing a base level of? 2.926 from 1 references from > creation > > time? 0.000?? CHUNK X2 Activation? 2.926 Latency? 0.054 > >?? Time? 0.500: Ret Fired > >?? Time? 0.500: Ret Selected > > ==> NIL > >?? Sources of activation are: nil > >????? Computing a base level of? 2.841 from 1 references from > creation time > > 0.000????? Computing a base level of? 2.841 from 1 references from > creation > > time? 0.000?? CHUNK X2 Activation? 2.841 Latency? 0.058 > >?? Time? 0.550: Ret Fired > >?? Time? 0.550: Ret Selected > > chunk X2 will be retrieved at time .554, but the production is > selected and > fired again at time .550 so the retrieval doesn't get a chance to > complete. > > Hope that clears things up, > Dan > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 2532 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bruno.emond at nrc.ca Sat Nov 30 13:36:57 2002 From: bruno.emond at nrc.ca (Bruno Emond) Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 13:36:57 -0500 Subject: [ACT-R-users] puzzled by act-r 5.0.6 behavior In-Reply-To: <3534152091.1038621270@[192.168.123.126]> Message-ID: Dan, Thanks for the explanation. I guess this is a good example of parallel processing between modules. Now is there a way to force act-r to wait for the retrieval to be finished or do I need to add a third production (see below)? (p ret1 ??? =goal> ??? isa goal status retrieve ??? ==> ??? +retrieval> ??? isa c =goal> status retrieving ??? ) (p ret2 ??? =goal> ??? isa goal status retrieving =retrieval> ??? isa c ??? ==> ??? -goal> ??? ) (p ret3 ??? =goal> ??? isa goal status retrieving ??? ==> ??? !output! "Just waiting for my memory to catch up" ??? ) On Saturday, Nov 30, 2002, at 01:54 America/Montreal, Dan Bothell wrote: > > > --On Friday, November 29, 2002 4:27 PM -0500 Bruno Emond > wrote: > > > I am puzzled by a retrieval behavior in ACT-R 5. > > It seems that there is a range of activation values for which > > neither a chunk nor the failure chunked are retrieved. > > > > What's happening is that the next production is firing before the > retrieval > completes, thus canceling the previous attempt.? In the trace the > latency > displayed shows when that retrieval would complete if it wasn't > canceled.? So, > here for instance > > > /* > > Then there is the problematic section. Between an activation of > 2.926 and > > 2.000 nil is returned, not chunk x2 or failure. Even below and > activation of > > 2.000 nil is returned, contrary to the previous example. > > */ > > > >?? Sources of activation are: nil > >????? Computing a base level of? 2.926 from 1 references from > creation time > > 0.000????? Computing a base level of? 2.926 from 1 references from > creation > > time? 0.000?? CHUNK X2 Activation? 2.926 Latency? 0.054 > >?? Time? 0.500: Ret Fired > >?? Time? 0.500: Ret Selected > > ==> NIL > >?? Sources of activation are: nil > >????? Computing a base level of? 2.841 from 1 references from > creation time > > 0.000????? Computing a base level of? 2.841 from 1 references from > creation > > time? 0.000?? CHUNK X2 Activation? 2.841 Latency? 0.058 > >?? Time? 0.550: Ret Fired > >?? Time? 0.550: Ret Selected > > chunk X2 will be retrieved at time .554, but the production is > selected and > fired again at time .550 so the retrieval doesn't get a chance to > complete. > > Hope that clears things up, > Dan > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 2532 bytes Desc: not available URL: