Developing reproducible and comprehensible computational models

Artificial Intelligence

Volumn 144, Issue 1-2, 2003, Pages 251-263

  Lane, Peter C R ^a   Gobet, Fernand ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Behavioural tests; Computational models; Methodology; Simulations

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

BEHAVIORAL TESTS;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

EID: 0037370417     PISSN: 00043702     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0004-3702(02)00384-3     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Beck K. Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. 1999;Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
2. Cooper R., Fox J., Farringdon J., Shallice T. A systematic methodology for cognitive modelling. Artificial Intelligence. 85:1996;3-44.
3. Cooper R., Shallice T. Soar and the case for unified theories of cognition. Cognition. 55:1995;115-149.
4. Cooper R., Yule P., Fox J., Sutton D. COGENT: An environment for the development of cognitive models. Schmid U., Krems J.F., Wysotzki F. Mind Modelling: A Cognitive Science Approach to Reasoning, Learning and Memory. 1998;55-82 Pabst Science Publishers, Lengerich.
5. de Groot A.D., Gobet F. Perception and Memory in Chess: Heuristics of the Professional Eye. 1996;Van Gorcum, Assen.
6. Dijkstra E.W. A Discipline of Programming. 1965;Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
7. Feigenbaum E.A., Simon H.A. EPAM-like models of recognition and learning. Cognitive Sci. 8:1984;305-336.
8. Fowler M. Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code. 1999;Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
9. Gobet F., Lane P.C.R., Croker S.J., Cheng P.C.-H., Jones G., Oliver I., Pine J.M. Chunking mechanisms in human learning. Trends in Cognitive Sci. 5:2001;236-243.
10. Gobet F., Ritter F.E. Individual data analysis and Unified Theories of Cognition: A methodological proposal. Taatgen N., Aasman J. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Cognitive Modelling. 2000;150-157 Universal Press, Veenendaal, The Netherlands.
11. Gobet F., Simon H.A. Five seconds or sixty? Presentation time in expert memory. Cognitive Sci. 24:2000;651-682.
12. Gravemeijer K. Mediating between concrete and abstract. Nunes T., Bryant P. Learning and Teaching Mathematics: An International Perspective. 1997;315-345 Psychology Press, Hove, UK.
13. S. Peyton Jones, Haskell 98: A non-strict, purely functional language, Available from http://www.haskell.org/, 2001.
14. Kernighan B.W., Pike R. The Practice of Programming. 1999;Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
15. Knuth D.E. The TeXbook. 1984;Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
16. Knuth D.E. The errors of TeX. Software - Practice and Experience. 19:1989;607-685.
17. Knuth D.E. Literate Programming. 1992;Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford, CA.
18. Lightfoot D. Formal Specification Using Z. 2001;Palgrave, Basingstoke, UK.
19. McCarthy J. A mathematical theory of computation. Proc. Western Joint Comp. Conf. Los Angeles, May 1961, and Proc. IFIP Congress, 1961. 1963;225-238 North-Holland, Amsterdam.
20. Milnes B. The specification of the Soar cognitive architecture using Z, Technical Report, CMU-CS-92-169, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA. 1992.
21. Morgan C. Programming from Specifications. 1998;Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
22. Newell A. You can't play 20 questions with nature and win: Projective comments on the papers of this symposium. Chase W.G. Visual Information Processing. 1973;283-308 Academic Press, New York.
23. Newell A. Unified Theories of Cognition. 1990;Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
24. Reitman W. Cognition and Thought. 1965;Wiley, New York.
25. Wall L., Christiansen T., Schwartz R. Programming Perl. 1996;O'Reilly.