↓ Skip to main content

Quantum structure of negation and conjunction in human thought

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Quantum structure of negation and conjunction in human thought
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01447
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diederik Aerts, Sandro Sozzo, Tomas Veloz

Abstract

We analyze in this paper the data collected in a set of experiments investigating how people combine natural concepts. We study the mutual influence of conceptual conjunction and negation by measuring the membership weights of a list of exemplars with respect to two concepts, e.g., Fruits and Vegetables, and their conjunction Fruits And Vegetables, but also their conjunction when one or both concepts are negated, namely, Fruits And Not Vegetables, Not Fruits And Vegetables, and Not Fruits And Not Vegetables. Our findings sharpen and advance existing analysis on conceptual combinations, revealing systematic deviations from classical (fuzzy set) logic and probability theory. And, more important, our results give further considerable evidence to the validity of our quantum-theoretic framework for the combination of two concepts. Indeed, the representation of conceptual negation naturally arises from the general assumptions of our two-sector Fock space model, and this representation faithfully agrees with the collected data. In addition, we find a new significant and a priori unexpected deviation from classicality, which can exactly be explained by assuming that human reasoning is the superposition of an "emergent reasoning" and a "logical reasoning," and that these two processes are represented in a Fock space algebraic structure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Luxembourg 1 4%
Australia 1 4%
Unknown 21 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 22%
Other 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Lecturer 2 9%
Other 5 22%
Unknown 2 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 5 22%
Physics and Astronomy 3 13%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Philosophy 2 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 9%
Other 7 30%
Unknown 2 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,824,681
of 24,010,679 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#15,052
of 32,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,758
of 277,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#293
of 538 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,010,679 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,234 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,916 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 538 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.