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

Springer proceedings in mathematics & statistics

Quantum Probability for Modeling Cognition, Decision Making, and Artificial Intelligence

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Published Jan 1, 2022• 1 citation
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/978-3-031-06170-7_4

Related papers

Quantum-like cognition and AI toward the convergence of natural and artificial intelligence

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Abstract The gap between natural and artificial intelligence is often discussed in terms of creativity, contextual adaptability, and non-algorithmic decision-making capacities where human cognition appears fundamentally different from current AI systems. This paper argues that developing quantum and quantum-like models of cognition, decision-making, and AI provides a promising pathway for narrowing, and perhaps essentially bridging, this gap. Empirical studies of human cognition and decision-making reveal systematic deviations from classical probability, logic, and information theory—manifesting as contextuality, order effects, interference (such as conjunction and disjunction effects), task incompatibility, and apparent randomness. These phenomena are well captured by quantum probability theory and related quantum-like frameworks, which provide a rigorous mathematical formalism—Hilbert spaces, superposition, entanglement, and decoherence—for modeling cognitive states and their evolution. Such models go beyond metaphor, showing that aspects of human reasoning can be more faithfully represented using quantum-like rather than classical probabilistic structures. Although genuine quantum (based on quantum physics) and quantum-like approaches share the same mathematical foundation, they differ experimentally. Both stimulate the development of novel AI architectures: quantum AI (QAI) and quantum-like AI (QLAI). While QAI depends on advances in quantum computing, QLAI can be realized on classical digital or analog hardware. The advancement of both offers a promising route to reducing—and potentially bridging—the divide between natural and artificial intelligence. This paper sets out a conceptual program to unify natural and artificial intelligence via quantum/quantum-like models of consciousness/cognition and AI.

Discover Artificial Intelligence•Feb 8, 2026•1 citation

Statistical and subjective interpretations of probability in quantum-like models of cognition and decision making

Emmanuel E. Haven, Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Journal of Mathematical Psychology•Mar 9, 2016•38 citations

Contextual Probability in Quantum Physics, Cognition, Psychology, Social Science, and Artificial Intelligence

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

The frontiers collection•Jan 1, 2022•2 citations

Quantum probability and the mathematical modelling of decision-making

Emmanuel E. Haven, Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Nov 30, 2015•18 citations

Natural Versus Artificial Intelligence in the Light of Quantum-Like Cognition

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

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.

•Jan 6, 2026•0 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
Abstract The gap between natural and artificial intelligence is often discussed in terms of creativity, contextual adaptability, and non-algorithmic decision-making capacities where human cognition appears fundamentally different from current AI systems. This paper argues that developing quantum and quantum-like models of cognition, decision-making, and AI provides a promising pathway for narrowing, and perhaps essentially bridging, this gap. Empirical studies of human cognition and decision-making reveal systematic deviations from classical probability, logic, and information theory—manifesting as contextuality, order effects, interference (such as conjunction and disjunction effects), task incompatibility, and apparent randomness. These phenomena are well captured by quantum probability theory and related quantum-like frameworks, which provide a rigorous mathematical formalism—Hilbert spaces, superposition, entanglement, and decoherence—for modeling cognitive states and their evolution. Such models go beyond metaphor, showing that aspects of human reasoning can be more faithfully represented using quantum-like rather than classical probabilistic structures. Although genuine quantum (based on quantum physics) and quantum-like approaches share the same mathematical foundation, they differ experimentally. Both stimulate the development of novel AI architectures: quantum AI (QAI) and quantum-like AI (QLAI). While QAI depends on advances in quantum computing, QLAI can be realized on classical digital or analog hardware. The advancement of both offers a promising route to reducing—and potentially bridging—the divide between natural and artificial intelligence. This paper sets out a conceptual program to unify natural and artificial intelligence via quantum/quantum-like models of consciousness/cognition and AI.
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.
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.