There are many examples of human decision making which cannot be modeled by classical probabilistic and logic models, on which the current AI systems are based. Hence the need for a modeling framework which can enable intelligent systems to detect and predict cognitive biases in human decisions to facilitate better human-agent interaction. We give a few examples of irrational behavior and use a generalized probabilistic model inspired by the mathematical framework of Quantum Theory to model and explain such behavior.
There are many examples of human decision making which cannot be modeled by classical probabilistic and logic models, on which the current AI systems are based. Hence the need for a modeling framework which can enable intelligent systems to detect and predict cognitive biases in human decisions to facilitate better human-agent interaction. We give a few examples of irrational behavior and use a generalized probabilistic model inspired by the mathematical framework of Quantum Theory to model and explain such behavior.
Artificial intelligence is set to incorporate additional decision space that has traditionally been the purview of humans. However, AI systems that support decision making also entail the rationalization of AI outputs by humans. Yet, incongruencies between AI and human rationalization processes may introduce uncertainties in human decision making, which require new conceptualizations to improve the predictability of these interactions. The application of quantum probability theory (QPT) to human cognition is on the ascent and warrants potential consideration to human-AI decision making to improve these outcomes. This perspective paper explores how QPT may be applied to human-AI interactions and contributes by integrating these concepts into human-in-the-loop decision making. To capture this and offer a more comprehensive conceptualization, we use human-in-the-loop constructs to explicate how recent applications of QPT can ameliorate the models of interaction by providing a novel way to capture these behaviors. Followed by a summary of the challenges posed by human-in-the-loop systems, we discuss newer theories that advance models of the cognitive system by using quantum probability formalisms. We conclude by outlining areas of promising future research in human-AI decision making in which the proposed methods may apply.
Cognitive biases of the human mind significantly influence the human decision-making process. However, they are often neglected in modeling selection behaviors and hence deemed irrational. Here, we introduce a cognitive quantum-like approach for modeling human biases by simulating society as a quantum system and using a Quantum-like Bayesian network (QBN) structure. More specifically, we take inspiration from the electric field to improve our recent entangled QBN approach to model the initial bias due to unequal probabilities in parent nodes. Entangled QBN structure is particularly suitable for modeling bias behavior due to changing the state of systems with each observation and considering every decision-maker an integral part of society rather than an isolated agent. Hence, biases caused by emotions between agents or past personal experiences are also modeled by the social entanglement concept motivated by entanglement in quantum physics. In this regard, we propose a bias potential function and a new quantum-like entanglement witness in Hilbert space to introduce a biased variant of the entangled QBN (BEQBN) model based on quantum probability. The predictive BEQBN is evaluated on two well-known empirical tasks. Results indicate the superiority of the BEQBN by achieving the first rank compared to classical BN and six QBN approaches and presenting more realistic predictions of human behaviors.
Organizational decision making is often explored with theories from the heuristics and biases research program, which have demonstrated great value as descriptions of how people in organizations make decisions. Nevertheless, rational analysis and classical probability theory are still seen by many as the best accounts of how decisions should be made and classical probability theory is the preferred framework for cognitive modelling for many researchers. The focus of this work is quantum probability theory, an alternative probabilistic framework. Results in decision making, which appear paradoxical from a perspective of classical probability theory, may make perfect sense if one adopts quantum probability theory. We review some cognitive models of decision making based on quantum probability theory. Each of these models is based on a challenge to prescription from classical probability theory. The transition from labeling a particular behavior as irrational, by classical probability standards, to (potentially) rational (or, at any rate, not fallacious), raises interesting possibilities, including that of characterizing certain heuristics in formal, probabilistic terms.
The increasing complexity of modern decision-making environments has challenged the effectiveness of classical mathematical models. Traditional probabilistic frameworks often struggle to represent uncertainty, ambiguity, contextual dependence, and nonlinear interactions among decision variables. Quantum-inspired mathematical models have emerged as a promising interdisciplinary approach that leverages mathematical principles derived from quantum theory without requiring quantum computing hardware. These models utilize concepts such as superposition, interference, entanglement, and contextuality to represent complex decision processes more accurately. This paper explores the theoretical foundations, mathematical structures, and applications of quantum-inspired decision models in complex systems. The study examines how quantum probability theory provides a more flexible representation of human cognition, organizational decision-making, financial forecasting, and artificial intelligence systems. Furthermore, the paper discusses mathematical formulations, implementation strategies, advantages, challenges, and future research directions. The findings suggest that quantum-inspired models offer significant potential for addressing uncertainty and dynamic interactions in complex decision environments, thereby contributing to the advancement of intelligent decision support systems.
Purpose: Decision-making under uncertainty remains a foundational challenge in cognitive science and artificial intelligence. Classical Bayesian Probability Models (CBM) often fail to explain paradoxical cognitive behaviors such as order effects, ambiguity aversion, and context-dependent reasoning. This study seeks to compare Quantum Probability Theory (QPT) and Classical Bayesian Models in their ability to capture the dynamics of human decision-making. It aims to determine which framework more accurately reflects the cognitive mechanisms underlying reasoning under uncertainty. Methodology: A qualitative, exploratory research design was adopted, involving in-depth semi-structured interviews with 16 experts across psychology, philosophy, artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience. Participants were purposively selected for their theoretical and empirical expertise in probabilistic reasoning. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, guided by the Dual-Process Theory and Busemeyer’s Quantum Cognition framework. The analysis emphasized participants’ perspectives on theoretical assumptions, cognitive plausibility, and predictive utility between QPT and CBM paradigms. Findings: Thematic findings reveal that Quantum Probability Theory offers superior explanatory power in contexts involving cognitive ambiguity, contextual dependence, and non-commutativity of mental operations. Participants consistently reported that QPT better models real-world reasoning tasks where classical logic collapses, capturing the fluid and context-sensitive nature of human judgment. Conversely, while CBM remains effective in structured, low-uncertainty scenarios, it fails to accommodate superposition and interference effects inherent in human cognition. Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice, and Policy (Recommendations): The study contributes theoretically by demonstrating how quantum probabilistic models expand existing theories of bounded rationality and probabilistic reasoning in cognitive science. Practically, it encourages interdisciplinary collaboration between cognitive scientists, AI researchers, and philosophers to refine decision models that mirror human intuition more closely. Policy-wise, the findings support the integration of quantum-inspired approaches in the design of intelligent decision-support systems and cognitive architectures. The study recommends continued empirical validation of QPT within applied domains—such as behavioral economics, machine learning, and cognitive modeling—to strengthen its predictive and explanatory robustness.
Contemporary discussions of the gap between natural and artificial intelligence often emphasize human capacities such as contextual reasoning, cognitive flexibility, and non-classical decision-making. This paper proposes that quantum and quantum-like models of cognition and decision processes offer a principled framework for addressing these differences. A growing body of empirical evidence shows that human reasoning systematically violates the assumptions of classical probability and logic, exhibiting contextuality, order effects, interference phenomena, and task incompatibility. Quantum probability theory and related quantum-like formalisms provide mathematically rigorous tools—based on Hilbert spaces, superposition, and entanglement—that capture these features more naturally than classical models. While quantum and quantum-like approaches share a common mathematical structure, they differ in physical implementation, motivating two complementary directions in artificial intelligence: quantum AI and quantum-like AI. Together, these approaches suggest a viable pathway toward narrowing, and potentially bridging, the divide between natural and artificial intelligence by grounding AI architectures in models aligned with the structure of human cognition.