7,051 reputation
336113
bio website cs.mcgill.ca/~akazna
location Montreal, Canada
age 25
visits member for 3 years, 2 months
seen yesterday

From the School of Computer Science and Department of Psychology at McGill University, I marvel at the world through algorithmic lenses. My specific interests are in quantum computing, evolutionary game theory, modern evolutionary synthesis, and theoretical cognitive science. Previously I was at the Institute for Quantum Computing and Department of Combinatorics & Optimization at the University of Waterloo and a visitor to the Centre for Quantum Technologies at the National University of Singapore.


May
14
comment List of experiments contradicting the expected utility model
I completely disagree with @NickStauner, there is absolutely no way in which EUT fits with Cross Validated, and it is perfectly on topic here because psychology was central to forming behavioral economics, and early behavioral economics formed largely as a way to explain failures of EUT.
May
14
comment List of experiments contradicting the expected utility model
Also, it would be better if you expanded your question to be more self-contained for those that might not be familiar, by for instance giving a one sentence sketch of expected utility theory (because there are different levels of generality people use). I would also avoid "Most famous paradoxes" since that is a judgement call and experimental results are only 'paradoxical' if you make the mistake of assuming expected utility theory describes reality; just 'experiments contradicting EUT' seems more neutral.
May
14
comment List of experiments contradicting the expected utility model
@MartinVanderLinden I don't think a properly general St. Petersburg paradox is all that easy to step around; it requires a utility function that is bounded from above, which I almost never see in econ. For more, see the 4th paragraph of this blog post.
May
9
comment What is the mechanism explaining the effect of a positive attitude on immune system functioning?
Thanks for the reference @KeeganKeplinger, the reason that I was skeptical is that one would expect the placebo effect and positive attitude to work via the same mechanism, thus there is no clear way to do a placebo control for 'positivity' as you would for a drug. You could, however, design an experiment where every day the patient is asked to list and focus on the positive or negative (depending on which experimental group they are in) effects of their situation, and then compare the results of the two groups.
May
1
comment Does the Minnesota 12 steps model really produce an effective change in the treatment of drugs addictions?
@NickStauner I wish I could blame it on that, but I am on my laptop and it was just me doing too many things at once and not paying attention to what my fingers were typing. It is pretty common for me.
May
1
comment Does the Minnesota 12 steps model really produce an effective change in the treatment of drugs addictions?
Your question received a lot of close votes for "unclear what you are asking". I have tried to restructure your post, isolated the questions from the background, added more tags, and a link. If I changed the intent of your question then please roll-back or make more edits. You also make a claim in your question ("its duration is also too short to do it") without any evidence. Please provide a reference for this claim, or remove it.
May
1
comment Theoretical grounding for Agile/Scrum methodologies in software development
The people who voted to close (one of them has withdrawn their vote since the edits), voted it as "unclear what you are asking". Hopefully this has clarified it for them.
Apr
17
comment Is the Orch-OR Penrose-Hameroff model for consciousness sensible?
@remDup okay. I will close this question as a duplicate of the first one. After you read those friends, if you have further questions then feel free to ask a new question or edit this one with further clarifications (if you edit then flag the question after editing so I know you want it reopened).
Apr
16
comment Is the Orch-OR Penrose-Hameroff model for consciousness sensible?
As @KeeganKeplinger mentions, can you explain why this discussion doesn't answer you? If you want to read further then maybe this reddit discussion and my blog post might guide you as to why people usually don't usually seriously consider Penrose & Hameroff.
Apr
14
comment How to compare tasks completed by neural architectures objectively?
This is a nice question. One approach is to go as you are proposing from the direction of task difficulty, a dual idea would be to look at the complexity of the neural networks that solve the tasks. For that you might find this CogSci question and this cstheory question useful.
Apr
9
comment References for biologically plausible models of knowledge representation?
@Seanny123 I wasn't suggesting characterizing it as such. I was just giving examples of questions that are "how biologically plausible is x?" or "what are the downsides of x?" and x just happened to be bayesian models because those are posts I happened to remember.
Apr
9
comment References for biologically plausible models of knowledge representation?
@Seanny123 your comment could be turned into a separate question on the biological feasibility of VSA. Kind of like similar but more broad questions for biological plausibility and other downsides and limitations of bayesian models.
Mar
6
comment Overview of Pitts & McCullough (1943) “A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity”
I will look into having your previous accounts merged into this one. Thank you for registering.
Mar
5
comment Overview of Pitts & McCullough (1943) “A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity”
You have at least three seperate accounts: 1, 2, 3. All of them are unregistered, if you register an account then we can merge all of them together which will allow you to more fully participate in this StackExchange.
Mar
5
comment Overview of Pitts & McCullough (1943) “A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity”
Their paper is cited by many as the first introduction of deterministic finite state automata into computer science (although in my opinion some work in idustrial engineering preceeds this). Thus it is very important for the history of CS; I don't think it is nearly as important for neuroscience, unfortunately :(.
Mar
4
comment Does explaining a visual guidance system affect visual attention distribution?
When this leaves testing, and is used with (I assume) student drivers, will it be explained to them? Or are you just trying to use this in a study to learn how people scan normally and giving the cues as an "aha! I gotcha! There was danger here!"?
Mar
3
comment How does human brain pick out the most likely representation of object when an object is ambiguous?
How is feature recognition any different from voting of different networks? What do you think recognizes the features? Or do you literally believe that there is a "potato" and a "grenade" neural network in your brain that is somehow distinct from the "networks for other objects"? Finally, is it possible to remove the images? They don't add anything to the question except length.
Mar
3
comment What is relationship between being a good person and functioning in society?
Welcome to CogSci @DavidBasanta, that seems like an interesting question that is too long for comments. You should consider making it a separate self-contained question on the site.
Mar
3
comment Are words and ideas written in a distinctive font easier to remember?
If something is less legible then it takes more effort to read and since you devote more effort, you are more likely to engage in more active reading which tends to promote retention. I would explore this route.
Feb
14
comment When was it recognized that thinking occurs in the brain and not in the heart?
I think this is historic cherry-picking; if you dig enough among the Greeks you will find almost any belief (most prominent example of this is saying that the Greeks predicted atomic theory because of Democritus). The question becomes (as you point out in the comments), did any large body subscribe to this belief beyond a few disciples? I would argue that they didn't, because in the 3rd century BC, Aristotle was still promoting the brain as refrigerator and had much more historic significance than Alcmaeon.