Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:2604.08604

Quantum-like Cognition in Process Theories: An Analysis

Sean Tull, Masanao Ozawa

q-bio.NCquant-phSubmitted Apr 8, 2026• Announced Apr 9, 2026• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Various effects in human cognition, often considered `non-classical', have been argued to be most naturally modelled by quantum-like models of decision making. We extend this approach to describe models of cognition and decision-making in general probabilistic process theories, which include both classical probabilistic models and quantum instrument models as special cases. We show how many aspects of quantum-like cognition can be described diagrammatically in process theories, before using our approach to assess the arguments for quantum-like models. While standard Bayesian classical models are insufficient, we prove that any sequential decision data can in fact be given a more general form of classical instrument model, and see that even simple deterministic models can exhibit all cognitive effects. Restricting attention to instruments induced by measurements, such as classical Bayesian and quantum POVM models, rules out such a result, but is challenged by the fact that such instruments cannot account for certain effects. Finally, we argue that to strictly rule out classical instrument models one should make use of parallel composition in the modelling of joint decisions, and find real world cognitive data violating Bell inequalities.

Related papers

Quantum Cognition Models for Decision-Making Under Uncertainty

Ada Öztürkmen

Classical models of decision-making under uncertainty, grounded in expected utility theory and Bayesian probability, often fail to account for systematic cognitive anomalies such as preference reversals, order effects, ambiguity aversion, and context-dependent choices. Quantum cognition models offer a novel theoretical framework that applies the mathematical principles of quantum probability—such as superposition, interference, and non-commutativity—to cognitive processes without assuming physical quantum mechanisms in the brain. By representing cognitive states as probabilistic superpositions that collapse through decision “measurements,” these models provide parsimonious explanations for violations of classical rationality. This paper examines how quantum cognition frameworks capture contextual influence, belief updating, and interference effects in uncertain decision environments. Drawing on findings from cognitive psychology and behavioral economics, the study highlights the relevance of quantum cognition for applications in economic choice modeling, legal decision analysis, and artificial intelligence. The analysis suggests that quantum probability offers a robust alternative to classical approaches when modeling human decision-making in complex, ambiguous, and context-sensitive situations.

Human computer interaction.•Dec 25, 2025•1 citation

Quantum Probabilistic Models Revisited: The Case of Disjunction Effects in Cognition

Catarina Moreira, Andreas Wichert

Recent work in cognitive psychology has revealed that quantum probability theory provides another method of computing probabilities without falling into the restrictions that classical probability has in regard to modeling cognitive systems and decision-making. This enables the explanation of paradoxical scenarios that are difficult, or even impossible, to explain through classical probability theory. In this work, we perform an overview of the most important quantum models in the literature that are used to make predictions under scenarios where the Sure Thing Principle is being violated (the Quantum-Like Approach, the Quantum Dynamical Model, the Quantum Prospect Theory and Quantum-Like Bayesian Networks). We evaluated these models in terms of three metrics: interference effects, parameter tuning and scalability. The first examines if the analyzed model makes use of any type of quantum interference to explain human decision-making. The second is concerned with the assignment of values to a large number of quantum parameters. The last one consists of analyzing the ability of the models to be extended and generalized to more complex scenarios. We also studied the growth of the quantum parameters when the complexity and the levels of uncertainty of the decision scenario increase. Finally, we compared these quantum models with traditional classical models from the literature. We conclude with a discussion of the manner in which the models addressed in this paper can only deal with very small decision problems and why they do not scale well to larger, more complex decision scenarios.

Frontiers in Physics•Jun 28, 2016•28 citations

Decision-Making and Cognition Modeling from the Theory of Mental Instruments

Irina Basieva, Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

The authors present the theory of quantum measurements in a humanities friendly way. The most general process of decision-making is represented with the aid of the formalism of quantum apparatuses and instruments. This measurement formalism generalizes the standard one based on the von Neumann–Lüders projection postulate. Generalized quantum observables are mathematically represented as positive operator valued measures (POVMs) and state transformers resulting from the feedback of measurements to the states of systems that are given by quantum instruments. The quantum scheme of indirect measurements (a special realization of quantum instruments) is applied to model decision-making as resulting from the interaction between the belief and decision states. The authors analyze the specific features of quantum instruments which are important for cognitive and social applications. In particular, the state transformers given by quantum instruments are in general less invasive than the state projections. Thus quantum-like decision-making need not be viewed as a kind of state collapse. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks•Jan 1, 2017•12 citations

Quantum Probability vs. Classical Bayesian Models in Decision-Making: A Comparative Study

Chrispine Mulenga Mwambazi, Natalia Zulu, Kasonde Mundende

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.

Natural Science Journal•Oct 23, 2025•0 citations

Quantum modeling of common sense

Hamid R. Noori, Rainer Spanagel

Quantum theory is a powerful framework for probabilistic modeling of cognition. Strong empirical evidence suggests the context- and order-dependent representation of human judgment and decision-making processes, which falls beyond the scope of classical Bayesian probability theories. However, considering behavior as the output of underlying neurobiological processes, a fundamental question remains unanswered: Is cognition a probabilistic process at all?

Behavioral and Brain Sciences•May 14, 2013•5 citations

Insights from quantum cognitive models for organizational decision making.

Lee C. White, Emmanuel M. Pothos, Jerome R. Busemeyer

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.

Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition•Nov 24, 2014•25 citations
Various effects in human cognition, often considered `non-classical', have been argued to be most naturally modelled by quantum-like models of decision making. We extend this approach to describe models of cognition and decision-making in general probabilistic process theories, which include both classical probabilistic models and quantum instrument models as special cases. We show how many aspects of quantum-like cognition can be described diagrammatically in process theories, before using our approach to assess the arguments for quantum-like models. While standard Bayesian classical models are insufficient, we prove that any sequential decision data can in fact be given a more general form of classical instrument model, and see that even simple deterministic models can exhibit all cognitive effects. Restricting attention to instruments induced by measurements, such as classical Bayesian and quantum POVM models, rules out such a result, but is challenged by the fact that such instruments cannot account for certain effects. Finally, we argue that to strictly rule out classical instrument models one should make use of parallel composition in the modelling of joint decisions, and find real world cognitive data violating Bell inequalities.
Classical models of decision-making under uncertainty, grounded in expected utility theory and Bayesian probability, often fail to account for systematic cognitive anomalies such as preference reversals, order effects, ambiguity aversion, and context-dependent choices. Quantum cognition models offer a novel theoretical framework that applies the mathematical principles of quantum probability—such as superposition, interference, and non-commutativity—to cognitive processes without assuming physical quantum mechanisms in the brain. By representing cognitive states as probabilistic superpositions that collapse through decision “measurements,” these models provide parsimonious explanations for violations of classical rationality. This paper examines how quantum cognition frameworks capture contextual influence, belief updating, and interference effects in uncertain decision environments. Drawing on findings from cognitive psychology and behavioral economics, the study highlights the relevance of quantum cognition for applications in economic choice modeling, legal decision analysis, and artificial intelligence. The analysis suggests that quantum probability offers a robust alternative to classical approaches when modeling human decision-making in complex, ambiguous, and context-sensitive situations.
Recent work in cognitive psychology has revealed that quantum probability theory provides another method of computing probabilities without falling into the restrictions that classical probability has in regard to modeling cognitive systems and decision-making. This enables the explanation of paradoxical scenarios that are difficult, or even impossible, to explain through classical probability theory. In this work, we perform an overview of the most important quantum models in the literature that are used to make predictions under scenarios where the Sure Thing Principle is being violated (the Quantum-Like Approach, the Quantum Dynamical Model, the Quantum Prospect Theory and Quantum-Like Bayesian Networks). We evaluated these models in terms of three metrics: interference effects, parameter tuning and scalability. The first examines if the analyzed model makes use of any type of quantum interference to explain human decision-making. The second is concerned with the assignment of values to a large number of quantum parameters. The last one consists of analyzing the ability of the models to be extended and generalized to more complex scenarios. We also studied the growth of the quantum parameters when the complexity and the levels of uncertainty of the decision scenario increase. Finally, we compared these quantum models with traditional classical models from the literature. We conclude with a discussion of the manner in which the models addressed in this paper can only deal with very small decision problems and why they do not scale well to larger, more complex decision scenarios.
The authors present the theory of quantum measurements in a humanities friendly way. The most general process of decision-making is represented with the aid of the formalism of quantum apparatuses and instruments. This measurement formalism generalizes the standard one based on the von Neumann–Lüders projection postulate. Generalized quantum observables are mathematically represented as positive operator valued measures (POVMs) and state transformers resulting from the feedback of measurements to the states of systems that are given by quantum instruments. The quantum scheme of indirect measurements (a special realization of quantum instruments) is applied to model decision-making as resulting from the interaction between the belief and decision states. The authors analyze the specific features of quantum instruments which are important for cognitive and social applications. In particular, the state transformers given by quantum instruments are in general less invasive than the state projections. Thus quantum-like decision-making need not be viewed as a kind of state collapse. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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.
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.