Abstract
It is the focus of this work to extend and study the previously proposed quantum-like Bayesian networks (Moreira and Wichert, 2014, 2016) to deal with decision-making scenarios by incorporating the notion of maximum expected utility in influence diagrams. The general idea is to take advantage of the quantum interference terms produced in the quantum-like Bayesian Network to influence the probabilities used to compute the expected utility of some action. This way, we are not proposing a new type of expected utility hypothesis. On the contrary, we are keeping it under its classical definition. We are only incorporating it as an extension of a probabilistic graphical model in a compact graphical representation called an influence diagram in which the utility function depends on the probabilistic influences of the quantum-like Bayesian network.
Our findings suggest that the proposed quantum-like influence diagram can indeed take advantage of the quantum interference effects of quantum-like Bayesian Networks to maximise the utility of a cooperative behaviour in detriment of a fully rational defect behaviour under the prisoner’s dilemma game.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bruza, P., Wang, Z., Busemeyer, J.: Quantum cognition: a new theoretical approach to psychology. Trends Cogn. Sci 19, 383–393 (2015)
Busemeyer, J., Bruza, P.: Quantum Model of Cognition and Decision. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2012)
Busemeyer, J., Matthew, M., Wang, Z.: A quantum information processing explanation of disjunction effects. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual COnference of the Cognitive Science Society (2006a)
Busemeyer, J., Wang, Z., Lambert-Mogiliansky, A.: Empirical comparison of Markov and quantum models of decision making. J. Math. Psychol. 53, 423–433 (2009)
Busemeyer, J., Wang, Z., Townsend, J.: Quantum dynamics of human decision making. J. Math. Psychol. 50, 220–241 (2006b)
Detwarasiti, A., Shachter, R.D.: Influence diagrams for team decision analysis. Decis. Anal. 2, 207–228 (2005)
Deutsch, D.: Quantum theory of probability and decisions. Proc. Roy. Soc. A 455, 3129–3137 (1988)
Howard, R., Matheson, J.: Influence diagrams. In: Readings on the Principles and Applications of Decision Analysis. Strategic Decisions Group (1984)
Howard, R., Matheson, J.: Influence diagrams. Decis. Anal. 2, 127–143 (2005)
Hristova, E., Grinberg, M.: Disjunction effect in prisonner’s dilemma: evidences from an eye-tracking study. In: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (2008)
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., Tversky, A.: Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1982)
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect theory - an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47, 263–292 (1979)
Koller, D., Friedman, N.: Probabilistic Graphical Models: Principles and Techniques. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2009)
Kuhberger, A., Komunska, D., Josef, P.: The disjunction effect: does it exist for two-step gambles? Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 85, 250–264 (2001)
Lambdin, C., Burdsal, C.: The disjunction effect reexamined: relevant methodological issues and the fallacy of unspecified percentage comparisons. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 103, 268–276 (2007)
Lander, D., Shenoy, P.: Modeling and Valuing Real Options-Using Influence Diagrams. Technical report, School of Business, Babson College (2001)
Li, S., Taplin, J.: Examining whether there is a disjunction effect in prisoner’s dilemma game. Chin. J. Psychol. 44, 25–46 (2002)
Moreira, C., Wichert, A.: Interference effects in quantum belief networks. Appl. Soft Comput. 25, 64–85 (2014)
Moreira, C., Wichert, A.: Quantum-like Bayesian networks for modeling decision making. Front. Psychol. 7, 11 (2016)
Moreira, C., Wichert, A.: Exploring the relations between quantum-like Bayesian Networks and decision-making tasks with regard to face stimuli. J. Math. Psychol. 78, 86–95 (2017)
Mura, P.L.: Projective expected utility. J. Math. Psychol. 53, 408–414 (2009)
Pothos, E., Busemeyer, J.: A quantum probability explanation for violations of rational decision theory. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 276, 2171–2178 (2009)
Savage, L.: The Foundations of Statistics. Wiley, Hoboken (1954)
Shafir, E., Tversky, A.: Thinking through uncertainty: nonconsequential reasoning and choice. Cogn. Psychol. 24, 449–474 (1992)
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185, 1124–1131 (1974)
Tversky, A., Shafir, E.: The disjunction effect in choice under uncertainty. J. Psychol. Sci. 3, 305–309 (1992)
von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O.: Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1953)
Yukalov, V., Sornette, D.: Decision theory with prospect interference and entanglement. Theor. Decis. 70, 283–328 (2011)
Yukalov, V., Sornette, D.: Preference reversal in quantum decision theory. Front. Pschol.: Cogn. 6, 1538 (2015)
Zurek, W.: Entanglement symmetry, amplitudes, and probabilities: inverting Born’s rule. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 1–5 (2011)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Moreira, C., Wichert, A. (2019). Introducing Quantum-Like Influence Diagrams for Violations of the Sure Thing Principle. In: Coecke, B., Lambert-Mogiliansky, A. (eds) Quantum Interaction. QI 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11690. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35895-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35895-2_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-35894-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-35895-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)