Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Bridging Minds and Machines: Toward an Integration of AI and Cognitive Science

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read AI's progress has been performance-first and cognitively fragmented; this review argues the field should re-center on theory-driven, embodied, culturally situated, personalized, ethically co-evaluated systems.

desk verdict A useful, readable survey of AI-cognitive science intersections whose central claim is plausible, but the maturity table that supposedly operationalizes it is a subjective artifact with no rubric — still worth refereeing for the survey value. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.20674 v1 pith:JOHVAT22 submitted 2025-08-28 cs.AI q-bio.NC

Rui Mao , Qian Liu , Xiao Li , Erik Cambria , Amir Hussain This is my paper
classification cs.AIq-bio.NC
keywords CognitiveScienceArtificialIntelligenceCognition-inspiredAIforanalysisMaturitySymbolgroundingEmbodiedcognitionCulturalbiasinLLMs
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This review of the intersection of AI and cognitive science tries to establish a specific diagnosis: AI has advanced mainly as an engineering of task performance, while its cognitive foundations remain scattered across fields and largely unintegrated. The paper argues that the next stage of AI should be judged not only by accuracy but by whether systems deepen understanding of human minds. To make that concrete, it contributes a maturity analysis that rates 23 AI subfields on two scales: how far AI is inspired by cognitive theory, and how far AI serves cognitive analysis. The ratings show a lopsided picture: cognition-inspired techniques like attention, LSTM memory, and CNNs are fairly mature, while AI used for genuine cognitive analysis lags, especially in ethics, emotion, behavior, and culture. The paper then derives seven research directions, including aligning AI behavior with cognitive frameworks, grounding symbols in sensorimotor experience, embedding AI in embodiment and culture, personalization, multimodal integration, metacognition, and ethics as cognitive co-evolution.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is the two-level maturity matrix of Table 1. CIAI grades a field by how deeply cognitive principles are integrated into AI methods (Level 0 'Pre-Theoretical' to Level 4 'Paradigm-Level Influence'); AICA grades the same field by how deeply AI is used for cognitive analysis (Level 0 'No Relevance' to Level 4 'Integrated Epistemic Tool'). The matrix is applied to 23 fields, with representative techniques named per field; it does the argument's work by making the unevenness legible: for example, Behavior receives CIAI Level 4 but AICA Level 1, while Meaning receives Level 3 on both. The paper's seven recommendations are each keyed to the gaps the matrix exposes.

What would settle it

Independent raters, both cognitive scientists and AI researchers, could apply the paper's Level 0-4 definitions to the 23 fields without seeing Table 1; if inter-rater agreement is poor or average ratings diverge substantially from the paper's, the maturity analysis fails. A single counterexample also works: a field rated low that demonstrably meets the Level 3 or Level 4 criteria, such as affective computing used to test and refine appraisal theories of emotion, would blunt the claim that AI-for-cognitive-analysis is broadly immature.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is that AI and cognitive science are locked in an asymmetric relationship: cognitive theories repeatedly seed successful AI (attention, memory gating, hierarchical perception), but AI rarely returns the favor as a tool that tests or refines cognitive theory. The paper codifies this asymmetry in Table 1, rating 23 representative fields across philosophy, psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, and culture on two maturity scales: Cognition-Inspired AI (CIAI) and AI for Cognitive Analysis (AICA), each running from Level 0 to Level 4. Most CIAI entries sit at Levels 2-3, meaning cognitive principles are computationally realized and sometimes deployed, w

Load-bearing premise

The ratings in Table 1 are the load-bearing premise: they assign each of 23 fields a CIAI and AICA maturity level with no scoring rubric, no independent raters, and no empirical validation, so if those ratings are not reproducible, the paper's diagnosis and its seven recommendations lose their evidentiary base.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the diagnosis is right, task-accuracy benchmarks are insufficient measures of AI progress; evaluations should include cognitive alignment, explainability, uncertainty estimation, and cultural sensitivity.
  • Research priorities would shift toward cognitive architectures, neurosymbolic reasoning, developmental learning, and social cognition, rather than scaling models on ever-larger corpora alone.
  • Embodiment and culture stop being optional add-ons: systems that interact with physical environments and are evaluated across cultures become necessary for grounded meaning.
  • AI ethics would move from compliance checklists toward cognitive co-evolution: designing systems that support human flourishing, autonomy, and long-term societal effects.
  • Cognitive science would gain AI as an integrated epistemic tool, capable of generating hypotheses, running scalable experiments, and challenging core theories, not just classifying data.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial extension: the CIAI and AICA scales, if anchored by a scoring rubric and validated with multiple raters, could become a reusable assessment instrument for the field; the paper itself supplies neither rubric nor validation.
  • Editorial extension: the matrix's pattern, with AICA ratings nearly always at or below CIAI ratings, implies that cognitive science has so far gained less from AI than AI has gained from cognitive science; if true, targeted investment in AI-for-cognitive-analysis tools may deliver outsized returns.
  • Editorial extension: a direct test would rate newly released models on the two scales and correlate the ratings with independent behavioral benchmarks, such as theory-of-mind batteries or cross-cultural value surveys; positive correlation would strengthen the paper's core mapping.
  • Editorial extension: the symbol-grounding problem and the cultural-bias problem, which the paper treats as distinct challenges, may share a single root, meaning without situated use, suggesting that embodied, interactive grounding could address both at once.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper is a broad review of the intersections between AI and cognitive science, organized around philosophy, psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, and culture. The authors argue that while AI has been deeply inspired by cognitive theories, current AI development is dominated by task-performance goals and lacks the conceptual depth needed to model human cognition. The paper proposes seven future research directions—such as aligning AI with cognitive frameworks, grounding meaning in embodiment and culture, personalized cognitive models, and ethics via cognitive co-evaluation. The paper's distinctive quantitative contribution is Table 1, which rates the maturity of 'cognition-inspired AI' (CIAI) and 'AI for cognitive analysis' (AICA) across 23 fields using ordinal levels 0–4.

Significance. If accepted, the paper provides a valuable interdisciplinary map and a forward-looking research agenda that could influence funding and research priorities. Its strengths include a broad synthesis of cited work, concrete examples (e.g., GPT-4 theory-of-mind comparisons, LLM cultural bias, metaphor processing), and an explicit maturity-level framework that is, in principle, a useful organizing device. However, the central novel element—Table 1—is presented without a reproducible scoring methodology. The qualitative narrative in Sections 2–6 has independent support, but the quantitative 'uneven maturity' claim and the prioritization of the seven recommendations rest on an unvalidated rating scheme. The paper is therefore a useful review with a promising framework that currently needs methodological strengthening or reframing.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 7, Table 1] The CIAI/AICA maturity ratings in Table 1 are load-bearing for the paper's claim that AI–cognitive-science integration is 'promising but uneven' (Section 8), yet no scoring rubric, selection criteria for 'representative AI techniques,' rater protocol, or inter-rater reliability is provided. The Level 0–4 definitions are qualitative and do not give observable decision rules; for example, the boundary between Level 3 ('measurable improvements in task performance across multiple AI domains') and Level 4 ('reshaped dominant AI research agendas') is a discretionary judgment. Please provide a transparent scoring procedure, independent raters, or at minimum a sensitivity analysis, or explicitly reframe Table 1 as an illustrative expert-opinion heuristic with caveats. Without this, the 'uneven maturity' assertion is not reproducible and the motivation for the seven recommendations is weakened.
  2. [Section 4, Table 1] The Attention row in Table 1 is rated CIAI Level 3, yet Section 4 states that the Transformer 'introduced multi-head self-attention' and that attention mechanisms are foundational to modern AI. Under the paper's own Level 4 criterion ('Cognition-inspired paradigms have reshaped dominant AI research agendas... widely adopted across disciplines'), attention mechanisms would arguably qualify as Level 4. This inconsistency suggests that the ratings are not systematically derived from the cited evidence and exemplifies the need for a rubric. At minimum, the authors should explain why Attention is placed below Perception, which is rated Level 4.
  3. [Sections 2 and 3] Several strong claims about AI's lack of intentionality, subjective awareness, and understanding are asserted without supporting evidence or discussion of contrary positions. For example, Section 3 states that 'GenAI lacks subjective awareness and intentional understanding' as a matter of fact, and Section 2 asserts that 'AI can hardly understand the existential meaning, intentionality, and reality status' of generated entities. These claims are central to the paper's conclusion that current AI is 'shallow imitation' rather than 'deep modeling.' They should be qualified as contested philosophical/empirical positions, or supported with citations to both sides of the debate. As written, they overstate consensus where none exists.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Footnote 1] The phrase 'AI and Computing Intelligence' appears to be a typo for 'Computational Intelligence.' Please correct.
  2. [Section 3, Mental health] The sentence 'Using AI to detect mental health detection [96, 97] is vivid' is grammatically awkward and should be rephrased.
  3. [Figure 6] The caption says 'Integrated Values Surveys [165]', but reference [165] is a study of cultural bias in LLMs, not the original survey data source. Please cite the World Values Survey / European Values Study properly.
  4. [Table 1] The legend for the ■/□ symbols appears only after the table. Consider placing the maturity-level definitions before the table and adding a note stating how fields and representative techniques were selected.
  5. [References] Some references lack complete bibliographic details, e.g., [126] (MetaGPT) has no page or venue and [175] (OASIS) is listed as a workshop paper without a DOI. Please ensure consistent formatting.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a narrative review with no derivation chain, and its subjective maturity ratings are inputs, not predictions.

full rationale

The paper is a narrative review and position statement, not a formal derivation. It contains no fitted parameters, no predictive model, and no uniqueness theorem. The central observation that AI progress emphasizes task performance while cognitive foundations remain fragmented is supported by a survey of external literature and illustrative examples; the authors' own prior works appear only as representative citations for specific techniques (e.g., metaphor processing, semantic processing), never as the sole justification for the main argument. Table 1's CIAI/AICA maturity ratings are subjective expert judgments with no scoring rubric; however, they are inputs to the concluding 'promising but uneven' characterization, not predictions or derived outputs, so they do not constitute circularity. Although the authors self-cite frequently, these citations are not load-bearing; they are examples within a broader review, and self-citation alone is not circularity. The absence of an equation-level derivation chain means no step reduces to its own inputs by construction. The paper's recommendations are normative and independent of the precise numerical ratings. Therefore no significant circularity is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities. The paper introduces a maturity framework, but it is a classification scale rather than a fitted quantity or postulated entity. The main implicit cost is the assumption that the framework is valid and consistently applicable.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences classification scheme is an adequate organizational structure for the review.
    Section 1 adopts this classification; if it omits important fields (e.g., anthropology is simplified to culture), the review's coverage is incomplete.
  • ad hoc to paper The maturity levels in Table 1 are meaningful, mutually exclusive, and consistently applicable across the 23 rated fields.
    The paper introduces the levels and applies them without validating inter-rater reliability or showing that fields can be ranked on these scales.
  • domain assumption The cited references are representative of the key contributions in each discipline.
    The review's claims about 'current AI research' rely on selective citation; no systematic evidence for representativeness is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bridging Minds and Machines: Toward an Integration of AI and Cognitive Science." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JOHVAT22

@misc{pith2026250820674,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bridging Minds and Machines: Toward an Integration of AI and Cognitive Science},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JOHVAT22}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.20674}
}
read the original abstract

Cognitive Science has profoundly shaped disciplines such as Artificial Intelligence (AI), Philosophy, Psychology, Neuroscience, Linguistics, and Culture. Many breakthroughs in AI trace their roots to cognitive theories, while AI itself has become an indispensable tool for advancing cognitive research. This reciprocal relationship motivates a comprehensive review of the intersections between AI and Cognitive Science. By synthesizing key contributions from both perspectives, we observe that AI progress has largely emphasized practical task performance, whereas its cognitive foundations remain conceptually fragmented. We argue that the future of AI within Cognitive Science lies not only in improving performance but also in constructing systems that deepen our understanding of the human mind. Promising directions include aligning AI behaviors with cognitive frameworks, situating AI in embodiment and culture, developing personalized cognitive models, and rethinking AI ethics through cognitive co-evaluation.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Sparse Autoencoders Map Brain-LLM Alignment onto Cortical Semantic Topography

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Sparse autoencoders applied to GPT-2 and Llama models recover semantic features accounting for 94% of peak brain encoding performance and map onto distinct cortical semantic regions across three languages.

  2. Mind Meets Space: Rethinking Agentic Spatial Intelligence from a Neuroscience-inspired Perspective

    cs.AI 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Agent spatial intelligence is organized into six neuroscience-inspired modules, and the field is reviewed through that lens without any experimental validation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

202 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    American Educator 29(2), 31–35 (2005)

    Willingham, D.T.: Ask the cognitive scientist. American Educator 29(2), 31–35 (2005)

    2005

  2. [2]

    Nature 521(7553), 436–444 (2015)

    LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., Hinton, G.: Deep learning. Nature 521(7553), 436–444 (2015)

    2015

  3. [3]

    American Eco- nomic Review 106(7), 1577–1600 (2016)

    Thaler, R.H.: Behavioral economics: Past, present, and future. American Eco- nomic Review 106(7), 1577–1600 (2016)

    2016

  4. [4]

    MIT Press, MA, USA (2001)

    Wilson, R.A., Keil, F.C.: The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences. MIT Press, MA, USA (2001)

    2001

  5. [5]

    Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 15(5), 1684 (2024)

    Milli` ere, R.: Philosophy of cognitive science in the age of deep learning. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 15(5), 1684 (2024)

    2024

  6. [6]

    Pearson, London, England (2016)

    Russell, S.J., Norvig, P.: Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. Pearson, London, England (2016)

    2016

  7. [7]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 (2017)

    Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A.N., Kaiser, L., Polosukhin, I.: Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 (2017)

    2017

  8. [8]

    Neural Computation 9(8), 1735–1780 (1997)

    Hochreiter, S., Schmidhuber, J.: Long short-term memory. Neural Computation 9(8), 1735–1780 (1997)

    1997

Show all 202 references
  1. [9]

    Accessed: 18/05/2025 (2022)

    OpenAI: Introducing ChatGPT. Accessed: 18/05/2025 (2022). https://openai. com/blog/chatgpt 15

    2025

  2. [10]

    In: Proceedings of the 2024 Joint International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Language Resources and Evaluation, pp

    Mao, R., Chen, G., Zhang, X., Guerin, F., Cambria, E.: GPTEval: A survey on assessments of ChatGPT and GPT-4. In: Proceedings of the 2024 Joint International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Language Resources and Evaluation, pp. 7844–7866. International Committee on C...

    2024

  3. [11]

    Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 5, 778852 (2022)

    Langley, C., Cirstea, B.I., Cuzzolin, F., Sahakian, B.J.: Theory of mind and preference learning at the interface of cognitive science, neuroscience, and AI: A review. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 5, 778852 (2022)

    2022

  4. [12]

    Cognitive Computation 16(5), 2428–2436 (2024)

    Achler, T.: What AI, neuroscience, and cognitive science can learn from each other: An embedded perspective. Cognitive Computation 16(5), 2428–2436 (2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    Computational Brain & Behavior 7(4), 616–636 (2024)

    Van Rooij, I., Guest, O., Adolfi, F., Haan, R., Kolokolova, A., Rich, P.: Reclaim- ing AI as a theoretical tool for cognitive science. Computational Brain & Behavior 7(4), 616–636 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    Deleuze, G., Guattari, F.: What Is Philosophy? Columbia University Press, New York City, US (1994)

    1994

  7. [15]

    Cambridge Introductions to Philosophy

    Carroll, J..W., Markosian, N.: An Introduction to Metaphysics. Cambridge Introductions to Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (2010)

    2010

  8. [16]

    In: Zalta, E.N., Nodel- man, U

    Inwagen, P.V., Sullivan, M., Bernstein, S.: Metaphysics. In: Zalta, E.N., Nodel- man, U. (eds.) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    Computers in Human Behavior 133, 107289 (2022)

    Rauschnabel, P.A., Felix, R., Hinsch, C., Shahab, H., Alt, F.: What is XR? towards a framework for augmented and virtual reality. Computers in Human Behavior 133, 107289 (2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    Bojic, L.: Metaverse through the prism of power and addiction: what will happen when the virtual world becomes more attractive than reality? European Journal of Futures Research 10(1), 22 (2022)

    2022

  11. [19]

    Dehaene, S., Lau, H., Kouider, S.: What is consciousness, and could machines have it? Robotics, AI, and Humanity: Science, Ethics, and Policy, 43–56 (2021)

    2021

  12. [20]

    human autonomy: social robots, artificial intel- ligence (AI), and the nature of autonomy

    Formosa, P.: Robot autonomy vs. human autonomy: social robots, artificial intel- ligence (AI), and the nature of autonomy. Minds and Machines 31(4), 595–616 (2021)

    2021

  13. [21]

    Applied Linguistics Review 16(2), 797–807 (2025)

    O’Regan, J.P., Ferri, G.: Artificial intelligence and depth ontology: Implications for intercultural ethics. Applied Linguistics Review 16(2), 797–807 (2025)

    2025

  14. [22]

    Harper’s Magazine, 67 (1920) 16

    Frost, R.: Fire and ice. Harper’s Magazine, 67 (1920) 16

    1920

  15. [23]

    Broadview Press, Peterborough, Ontario (2009)

    Crumley, J.S.: An Introduction to Epistemology, 2nd edn. Broadview Press, Peterborough, Ontario (2009)

    2009

  16. [24]

    Jones & Bartlett Publishers, MA, USA (2009)

    Akerkar, R., Sajja, P.: Knowledge-based Systems. Jones & Bartlett Publishers, MA, USA (2009)

    2009

  17. [25]

    Communications of the ACM 38(11), 39–41 (1995)

    Miller, G.A.: WordNet: a lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM 38(11), 39–41 (1995)

    1995

  18. [26]

    In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol

    Mikolov, T., Sutskever, I., Chen, K., Corrado, G.S., Dean, J.: Distributed rep- resentations of words and phrases and their compositionality. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 26, pp. 1–9. Curran Associates, Inc., Lake Tahoe, USA (2013)

    2013

  19. [27]

    In: Burstein, J., Doran, C., Solorio, T

    Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., Toutanova, K.: BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In: Burstein, J., Doran, C., Solorio, T. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computati...

    2019

  20. [28]

    Harvard University Press, MA, USA (1986)

    Quine, W.V.O.: Philosophy of Logic, 2nd edn. Harvard University Press, MA, USA (1986)

    1986

  21. [29]

    Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 22(6), 776–858 (2022)

    K¨ orner, P., Leuschel, M., Barbosa, J., Costa, V.S., Dahl, V., Hermenegildo, M.V., Morales, J.F., Wielemaker, J., Diaz, D., Abreu, S., et al.: Fifty years of Prolog and beyond. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 22(6), 776–858 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    In: Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp

    Han, S., Schoelkopf, H., Zhao, Y., Qi, Z., Riddell, M., Zhou, W., Coady, J., Peng, D., Qiao, Y., Benson, L., Sun, L., Wardle-Solano, A., Szab´ o, H., Zubova, E., Burtell, M., Fan, J., Liu, Y., Wong, B., Sailor, M., Ni, A., Nan, L., Kasai, J., Yu, T., Zhang, R., Fabbri, A., Kry...

    2024

  23. [31]

    Artificial Intelligence Review 56(2), 865–913 (2023)

    Talpur, N., Abdulkadir, S.J., Alhussian, H., Hasan, M.H., Aziz, N., Bamhdi, A.: Deep neuro-fuzzy system application trends, challenges, and future perspectives: A systematic survey. Artificial Intelligence Review 56(2), 865–913 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    MIT press, MA, USA (1999)

    Manning, C., Schutze, H.: Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Process- ing. MIT press, MA, USA (1999)

    1999

  25. [33]

    17 Nature Computational Science 3(10), 833–838 (2023)

    Hagendorff, T., Fabi, S., Kosinski, M.: Human-like intuitive behavior and rea- soning biases emerged in large language models but disappeared in ChatGPT. 17 Nature Computational Science 3(10), 833–838 (2023)

    2023

  26. [34]

    Springer, Cham, Switzerland (2024)

    Cambria, E.: Understanding Natural Language Understanding. Springer, Cham, Switzerland (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35, 24824–24837 (2022)

    Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q.V., Zhou, D., et al.: Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35, 24824–24837 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Morgan Kaufmann, CA, USA (2014)

    Kolodner, J.: Case-based Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, CA, USA (2014)

    2014

  29. [37]

    Communications of the ACM 58(9), 92–103 (2015)

    Davis, E., Marcus, G.: Commonsense reasoning and commonsense knowledge in artificial intelligence. Communications of the ACM 58(9), 92–103 (2015)

    2015

  30. [38]

    In: Proceedings of the 48th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR), Padua, Italy (2025)

    Shen, T., Mao, R., Wang, J., Zhang, X., Cambria, E.: Flow-guided direct prefer- ence optimization for knowledge graph reasoning with trees. In: Proceedings of the 48th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR), Padua, Italy (2025)

    2025

  31. [39]

    Minds and Machines 30(1), 99–120 (2020)

    Hagendorff, T.: The ethics of AI ethics: An evaluation of guidelines. Minds and Machines 30(1), 99–120 (2020)

    2020

  32. [40]

    Computers in Human Behavior 98, 277–284 (2019)

    Shin, D., Park, Y.J.: Role of fairness, accountability, and transparency in algorithmic affordance. Computers in Human Behavior 98, 277–284 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing 14(3), 1743–1753 (2023)

    Mao, R., Liu, Q., He, K., Li, W., Cambria, E.: The biases of pre-trained language models: An empirical study on prompt-based sentiment analysis and emotion detection. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing 14(3), 1743–1753 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    Cognitive Computation 17, 65 (2025)

    Ge, M., Mao, R., Cambria, E.: Discovering the cognitive bias of toxic language through metaphorical concept mappings. Cognitive Computation 17, 65 (2025)

    2025

  35. [43]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35, 27730–27744 (2022)

    Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., et al.: Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35, 27730–27744 (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.15248 (2024)

    Cambria, E., Malandri, L., Mercorio, F., Nobani, N., Seveso, A.: XAI meets LLMs: A survey of the relation between explainable AI and large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.15248 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  37. [45]

    In: Pro- ceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp

    Han, S., Mao, R., Cambria, E.: Hierarchical attention network for explainable depression detection on Twitter aided by metaphor concept mappings. In: Pro- ceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 94–104. International Committee on Computa...

    2022

  38. [46]

    Information Fusion 118, 102963 (2025)

    He, K., Mao, R., Lin, Q., Ruan, Y., Lan, X., Feng, M., Cambria, E.: A survey of 18 large language models for healthcare: From data, technology, and applications to accountability and ethics. Information Fusion 118, 102963 (2025)

    2025

  39. [47]

    Artificial Intelligence Review 58, 189 (2025)

    Yeo, W.J., Heever, W., Mao, R., Cambria, E., Satapathy, R., Mengaldo, G.: A comprehensive review on financial explainable AI. Artificial Intelligence Review 58, 189 (2025)

    2025

  40. [48]

    Perspectives on Psychological Science 3(1), 73–79 (2008)

    Bargh, J.A., Morsella, E.: The unconscious mind. Perspectives on Psychological Science 3(1), 73–79 (2008)

    2008

  41. [49]

    Apperly, I.A., Butterfill, S.A.: Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief-like states? Psychological Review 116(4), 953 (2009)

    2009

  42. [50]

    Child Development 72(3), 655–684 (2001)

    Wellman, H.M., Cross, D., Watson, J.: Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind devel- opment: The truth about false belief. Child Development 72(3), 655–684 (2001)

    2001

  43. [51]

    Nature Human Behaviour 8(7), 1285–1295 (2024)

    Strachan, J.W., Albergo, D., Borghini, G., Pansardi, O., Scaliti, E., Gupta, S., Saxena, K., Rufo, A., Panzeri, S., Manzi, G., et al.: Testing theory of mind in large language models and humans. Nature Human Behaviour 8(7), 1285–1295 (2024)

    2024

  44. [52]

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121(45), 2405460121 (2024)

    Kosinski, M.: Evaluating large language models in theory of mind tasks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121(45), 2405460121 (2024)

    2024

  45. [53]

    Scherer, K.R.: What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Social Science Information 44(4), 695–729 (2005)

    2005

  46. [54]

    Annual Review of Psychology 58(1), 373–403 (2007)

    Barrett, L.F., Mesquita, B., Ochsner, K.N., Gross, J.J.: The experience of emotion. Annual Review of Psychology 58(1), 373–403 (2007)

    2007

  47. [55]

    Journal of Educational Psychology 106(1), 121 (2014)

    Mega, C., Ronconi, L., De Beni, R.: What makes a good student? How emotions, self-regulated learning, and motivation contribute to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology 106(1), 121 (2014)

    2014

  48. [56]

    Approaches to Emotion, 319– 343 (2014)

    Ekman, P.: Expression and the nature of emotion. Approaches to Emotion, 319– 343 (2014)

    2014

  49. [57]

    Handbook of Cognition and Emotion, 45 (2000)

    Ekman, P.: Basic emotions. Handbook of Cognition and Emotion, 45 (2000)

    2000

  50. [58]

    Emotion Review5(2), 119–124 (2013)

    Moors, A., Ellsworth, P.C., Scherer, K.R., Frijda, N.H.: Appraisal theories of emotion: State of the art and future development. Emotion Review5(2), 119–124 (2013)

    2013

  51. [59]

    IEEE Intelligent Systems 35(5), 96–102 (2020)

    Susanto, Y., Livingstone, A., Ng, B.C., Cambria, E.: The Hourglass Model revisited. IEEE Intelligent Systems 35(5), 96–102 (2020)

    2020

  52. [60]

    Information Fusion 106, 102306 (2024)

    Fan, C., Lin, J., Mao, R., Cambria, E.: Fusing pairwise modalities for emotion 19 recognition in conversations. Information Fusion 106, 102306 (2024)

    2024

  53. [61]

    Science Robotics 9(88), 4724 (2024)

    Hu, Y., Chen, B., Lin, J., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Mehlman, C., Lipson, H.: Human- robot facial coexpression. Science Robotics 9(88), 4724 (2024)

    2024

  54. [62]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp

    Yang, D., Yang, K., Li, M., Wang, S., Wang, S., Zhang, L.: Robust emotion recognition in context debiasing. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 12447–12457 (2024)

    2024

  55. [63]

    IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing 15(3), 1711–1724 (2024)

    Chen, W., Xing, X., Chen, P., Xu, X.: Vesper: A compact and effective pre- trained model for speech emotion recognition. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing 15(3), 1711–1724 (2024)

    2024

  56. [64]

    In: Proceedings of International Conference on Human- Computer Interaction, DC, USA, pp

    Cambria, E., Zhang, X., Mao, R., Chen, M., Kwok, K.: SenticNet 8: Fusing emotion AI and commonsense AI for interpretable, trustworthy, and explainable affective computing. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Human- Computer Interaction, DC, USA, pp. 197–216 (2024)

    2024

  57. [65]

    Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28(6), 789–801 (2002)

    Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S.H., Knafo, A.: The big five personality factors and personal values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28(6), 789–801 (2002)

    2002

  58. [66]

    Myers, I.B., et al.: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator vol. 34. Consulting Psychologists Press, CA, USA (1962)

    1962

  59. [67]

    Journal of Applied Psychology 85(6), 869 (2000)

    Hurtz, G.M., Donovan, J.J.: Personality and job performance: the Big Five revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology 85(6), 869 (2000)

    2000

  60. [68]

    Internet and Higher Education 13(1-2), 89–95 (2010)

    Harrington, R., Loffredo, D.A.: MBTI personality type and other factors that relate to preference for online versus face-to-face instruction. Internet and Higher Education 13(1-2), 89–95 (2010)

    2010

  61. [69]

    The Journal of Behavioral Finance 6(4), 170–180 (2005)

    Filbeck, G., Hatfield, P., Horvath, P.: Risk aversion and personality type. The Journal of Behavioral Finance 6(4), 170–180 (2005)

    2005

  62. [70]

    Personality and Individual Differences 21(2), 303–307 (1996)

    Furnham, A.: The big five versus the big four: the relationship between the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and NEO-PI five factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences 21(2), 303–307 (1996)

    1996

  63. [71]

    Journal of Research in Personality 37(6), 504–528 (2003)

    Gosling, S.D., Rentfrow, P.J., Swann Jr, W.B.: A very brief measure of the Big- Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality 37(6), 504–528 (2003)

    2003

  64. [72]

    Neurocomputing 493, 340–350 (2022)

    Li, Y., Kazemeini, A., Mehta, Y., Cambria, E.: Multitask learning for emotion and personality traits detection. Neurocomputing 493, 340–350 (2022)

    2022

  65. [73]

    In: Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting 20 of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), vol

    Zhu, L., Li, W., Mao, R., Pandelea, V., Cambria, E.: PAED: Zero-shot persona attribute extraction in dialogues. In: Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting 20 of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), vol. 1, pp. 9771–9787. Association for Computational Linguistic...

    2023

  66. [74]

    Information Fusion 123, 103283 (2025)

    Wu, J., He, K., Mao, R., Shang, X., Cambria, E.: Harnessing the potential of multimodal EHR data: A comprehensive survey of clinical predictive modeling for intelligent healthcare. Information Fusion 123, 103283 (2025)

    2025

  67. [75]

    In: Proceedings of International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, DC, USA, pp

    Zhu, L., Mao, R., Cambria, E., Jansen, B.J.: Neurosymbolic AI for per- sonalized sentiment analysis. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, DC, USA, pp. 269–290 (2024)

    2024

  68. [76]

    IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 1–12 (2025)

    Xie, Y., Mao, R.: PGIF: A personality-guided iterative feedback graph net- work for multimodal conversational emotion recognition. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 1–12 (2025)

    2025

  69. [77]

    IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine 19(4), 63–78 (2024)

    Zhu, L., Li, W., Mao, R., Cambria, E.: HIPPL: Hierarchical intent-inferring pointer network with pseudo labeling for consistent persona-driven dialogue generation. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine 19(4), 63–78 (2024)

    2024

  70. [78]

    In: Proceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Con- ference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp

    Zhang, A., Chen, Y., Sheng, L., Wang, X., Chua, T.-S.: On generative agents in recommendation. In: Proceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Con- ference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 1807–1817 (2024)

    2024

  71. [79]

    Sutton, R.S., Barto, A.G., et al.: Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction vol

  72. [80]

    MIT Press, MA, USA (1998)

    1998

  73. [81]

    Annals of Neurosciences 17(3), 136 (2010)

    Pavlov, P.I.: Conditioned reflexes: an investigation of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex. Annals of Neurosciences 17(3), 136 (2010)

    2010

  74. [82]

    Cogent Psychology 9(1), 2041277 (2022)

    Gardner, B., Rebar, A.L., Lally, P.: How does habit form? Guidelines for tracking real-world habit formation. Cogent Psychology 9(1), 2041277 (2022)

    2022

  75. [83]

    MIT press, MA, USA (2017)

    Klein, G.A.: Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. MIT press, MA, USA (2017)

    2017

  76. [84]

    American Journal of Sociology 78(6), 1360–1380 (1973)

    Granovetter, M.S.: The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78(6), 1360–1380 (1973)

    1973

  77. [85]

    Implementation Science 6, 1–12 (2011)

    Michie, S., Van Stralen, M.M., West, R.: The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implementation Science 6, 1–12 (2011)

    2011

  78. [86]

    Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems 5(1), 411–444 (2022) 21

    Brunke, L., Greeff, M., Hall, A.W., Yuan, Z., Zhou, S., Panerati, J., Schoellig, A.P.: Safe learning in robotics: From learning-based control to safe reinforcement learning. Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems 5(1), 411–444 (2022) 21

    2022

  79. [87]

    A Study in the Sociology of Science 1(687), 159–167 (2004)

    Freeman, L., et al.: The development of social network analysis. A Study in the Sociology of Science 1(687), 159–167 (2004)

    2004

  80. [88]

    ACM Computing Surveys 56(9), 1–42 (2024)

    Du, K., Xing, F., Mao, R., Cambria, E.: Financial sentiment analysis: Techniques and applications. ACM Computing Surveys 56(9), 1–42 (2024)

    2024

  81. [89]

    Digital Health 9, 20552076231211634 (2023)

    Bendotti, H., Lawler, S., Chan, G.C., Gartner, C., Ireland, D., Marshall, H.M.: Conversational artificial intelligence interventions to support smoking cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Digital Health 9, 20552076231211634 (2023)

    2023

  82. [90]

    Computer Networks 189, 107859 (2021)

    Farrokhi, A., Farahbakhsh, R., Rezazadeh, J., Minerva, R.: Application of inter- net of things and artificial intelligence for smart fitness: A survey. Computer Networks 189, 107859 (2021)

    2021

  83. [91]

    The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 99–118 (1955)

    Simon, H.A.: A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 99–118 (1955)

    1955

  84. [92]

    Haggerty, R.J., Mrazek, P.J.: Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for preventive intervention research (1994)

    1994

  85. [93]

    Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 7, 1–9 (2012)

    Kawa, S., Giordano, J.: A brief historicity of the diagnostic and statistical man- ual of mental disorders: Issues and implications for the future of psychiatric canon and practice. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 7, 1–9 (2012)

    2012

  86. [94]

    American Journal of Psychiatry 182(5), 483–492 (2025)

    Olfson, M., McClellan, C., Zuvekas, S.H., Wall, M., Blanco, C.: Psychotherapy trends in the United States. American Journal of Psychiatry 182(5), 483–492 (2025)

    2025

  87. [95]

    Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 7(1), 511–535 (2011)

    Bonanno, G.A., Westphal, M., Mancini, A.D.: Resilience to loss and potential trauma. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 7(1), 511–535 (2011)

    2011

  88. [96]

    PLoS One 15(6), 0233648 (2020)

    Oerlemans, A.M., Wardenaar, K.J., Raven, D., Hartman, C.A., Ormel, J.: The association of developmental trajectories of adolescent mental health with early- adult functioning. PLoS One 15(6), 0233648 (2020)

    2020

  89. [97]

    npj Digital Medicine5(1), 46 (2022)

    Zhang, T., Schoene, A.M., Ji, S., Ananiadou, S.: Natural language processing applied to mental illness detection: a narrative review. npj Digital Medicine5(1), 46 (2022)

    2022

  90. [98]

    Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging 5(8), 791–798 (2020)

    Nielsen, A.N., Barch, D.M., Petersen, S.E., Schlaggar, B.L., Greene, D.J.: Machine learning with neuroimaging: evaluating its applications in psychiatry. Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging 5(8), 791–798 (2020)

    2020

  91. [99]

    1–29 (2025)

    Li, W., Zhu, L., Song, Y., Lin, R., Mao, R., You, Y.: Can a large language 22 model be a gaslighter? In: International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), Singapore, pp. 1–29 (2025)

    2025

  92. [100]

    Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 360(1456), 815–836 (2005)

    Friston, K.: A theory of cortical responses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 360(1456), 815–836 (2005)

    2005

  93. [101]

    Brain 121(6), 1013–1052 (1998)

    Mesulam, M.-M.: From sensation to cognition. Brain 121(6), 1013–1052 (1998)

    1998

  94. [102]

    IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (TVCG) (2020)

    Wang, Z.J., Turko, R., Shaikh, O., Park, H., Das, N., Hohman, F., Kahng, M., Chau, D.H.: CNN Explainer: Learning Convolutional Neural Networks with Interactive Visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (TVCG) (2020)

    2020

  95. [103]

    Visual Neuroscience 13(1), 87–100 (1996)

    Britten, K.H., Newsome, W.T., Shadlen, M.N., Celebrini, S., Movshon, J.A.: A relationship between behavioral choice and the visual responses of neurons in macaque MT. Visual Neuroscience 13(1), 87–100 (1996)

    1996

  96. [104]

    Nature Neuroscience 3(10), 965–966 (2000)

    Belin, P., Zatorre, R.J.: ‘what’,‘where’and ‘how’ in auditory cortex. Nature Neuroscience 3(10), 965–966 (2000)

    2000

  97. [105]

    Human Brain Mapping 34(4), 914–922 (2013)

    Gordon, I., Voos, A.C., Bennett, R.H., Bolling, D.Z., Pelphrey, K.A., Kaiser, M.D.: Brain mechanisms for processing affective touch. Human Brain Mapping 34(4), 914–922 (2013)

    2013

  98. [106]

    Cell 117(7), 981–991 (2004)

    Wang, Z., Singhvi, A., Kong, P., Scott, K.: Taste representations in the drosophila brain. Cell 117(7), 981–991 (2004)

    2004

  99. [107]

    Nature 444(7117), 316–321 (2006)

    Shepherd, G.M.: Smell images and the flavour system in the human brain. Nature 444(7117), 316–321 (2006)

    2006

  100. [108]

    Nature 503(7474), 51–58 (2013)

    Harris, K.D., Mrsic-Flogel, T.D.: Cortical connectivity and sensory coding. Nature 503(7474), 51–58 (2013)

    2013

  101. [109]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 25 (2012)

    Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., Hinton, G.E.: Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 25 (2012)

    2012

  102. [110]

    Perception & Psy- chophysics 27, 183–228 (1980)

    Coltheart, M.: Iconic memory and visible persistence. Perception & Psy- chophysics 27, 183–228 (1980)

    1980

  103. [111]

    N¨ a¨ at¨ anen, R., Paavilainen, P., Alho, K., Reinikainen, K., Sams, M.: Do event- related potentials reveal the mechanism of the auditory sensory memory in the human brain? Neuroscience Letters 98(2), 217–221 (1989)

    1989

  104. [112]

    Nature 267(5608), 241– 243 (1977)

    Di Lollo, V.: Temporal characteristics of iconic memory. Nature 267(5608), 241– 243 (1977)

    1977

  105. [113]

    NeuroReport 10(6), 1305–1308 (1999)

    J¨ a¨ askel¨ ainen, I.P., Hautam¨ aki, M., N¨ a¨ at¨ anen, R., Ilmoniemi, R.J.: Temporal 23 span of human echoic memory and mismatch negativity: revisited. NeuroReport 10(6), 1305–1308 (1999)

    1999

  106. [114]

    Memory, 71–111 (2020)

    Baddeley, A.: Working memory. Memory, 71–111 (2020)

    2020

  107. [115]

    Neural Plasticity and Memory: From Genes to Brain Imaging (2007)

    Escobar, M.L., Derrick, B.: Long-term potentiation and depression as putative mechanisms for memory formation. Neural Plasticity and Memory: From Genes to Brain Imaging (2007)

    2007

  108. [116]

    Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology 7(8), 021766 (2015)

    Squire, L.R., Genzel, L., Wixted, J.T., Morris, R.G.: Memory consolidation. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology 7(8), 021766 (2015)

    2015

  109. [117]

    Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology 7(7), 021758 (2015)

    Bailey, C.H., Kandel, E.R., Harris, K.M.: Structural components of synap- tic plasticity and memory consolidation. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology 7(7), 021758 (2015)

    2015

  110. [118]

    Dudai, Y.: The neurobiology of consolidations, or, how stable is the engram? Annual Review of Psychology 55(1), 51–86 (2004)

    2004

  111. [119]

    In: Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (2014)

    Cho, K., Merrienboer, B., Gulcehre, C., Bougares, F., Schwenk, H., Bengio, Y.: Learning phrase representations using RNN encoder-decoder for statistical machine translation. In: Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (2014)

    2014

  112. [120]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33, 9459–9474 (2020)

    Lewis, P., Perez, E., Piktus, A., Petroni, F., Karpukhin, V., Goyal, N., K¨ uttler, H., Lewis, M., Yih, W.-t., Rockt¨ aschel, T., et al.: Retrieval-augmented gen- eration for knowledge-intensive NLP tasks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33, 9459–9474 (2020)

    2020

  113. [121]

    Neuron 58(3), 306–324 (2008)

    Corbetta, M., Patel, G., Shulman, G.L.: The reorienting system of the human brain: from environment to theory of mind. Neuron 58(3), 306–324 (2008)

    2008

  114. [122]

    In: 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations (2015)

    Bahdanau, D., Cho, K.H., Bengio, Y.: Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. In: 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations (2015)

    2015

  115. [123]

    Brain Structure and Function 214, 655–667 (2010)

    Menon, V., Uddin, L.Q.: Saliency, switching, attention and control: a network model of insula function. Brain Structure and Function 214, 655–667 (2010)

    2010

  116. [124]

    Science 275(5306), 1593–1599 (1997)

    Schultz, W., Dayan, P., Montague, P.R.: A neural substrate of prediction and reward. Science 275(5306), 1593–1599 (1997)

    1997

  117. [125]

    Nature 441(7090), 223–226 (2006)

    Padoa-Schioppa, C., Assad, J.A.: Neurons in the orbitofrontal cortex encode economic value. Nature 441(7090), 223–226 (2006)

    2006

  118. [126]

    Nature 519(7541), 51–56 (2015) 24

    Li, N., Chen, T.-W., Guo, Z.V., Gerfen, C.R., Svoboda, K.: A motor cortex circuit for motor planning and movement. Nature 519(7541), 51–56 (2015) 24

    2015

  119. [127]

    In: The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations

    Hong, S., Zhuge, M., Chen, J., Zheng, X., Cheng, Y., Wang, J., Zhang, C., Wang, Z., Yau, S.K.S., Lin, Z., et al.: MetaGPT: Meta programming for a multi-agent collaborative framework. In: The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations

  120. [128]

    IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering 15, 184–199 (2021)

    Mishro, P.K., Agrawal, S., Panda, R., Abraham, A.: A survey on state-of-the- art denoising techniques for brain magnetic resonance images. IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering 15, 184–199 (2021)

    2021

  121. [129]

    Information Fusion 118, 102971 (2025)

    Wang, T., Mao, R., Liu, S., Cambria, E., Ming, D.: Explainable multi- frequency and multi-region fusion model for affective brain-computer interfaces. Information Fusion 118, 102971 (2025)

    2025

  122. [130]

    Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2002)

    Jackendoff, R.: Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2002)

    2002

  123. [131]

    Ladefoged, P., Johnson, K., Ladefoged, P.: A Course in Phonetics vol. 3. Thomson Wadsworth Boston, MA, USA (2006)

    2006

  124. [132]

    Chomsky, N., Halle, M.: The sound pattern of English (1968)

    1968

  125. [133]

    (eds.) Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection, pp

    Halle, M., Marantz, A.: In: Hale, K., Keyser, S.J. (eds.) Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection, pp. 111–176. MIT Press, MA, USA (1993)

    1993

  126. [134]

    Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, Germany (2002)

    Chomsky, N.: Syntactic Structures. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, Germany (2002)

    2002

  127. [135]

    Penguin, London, UK (2003)

    Pinker, S.: The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language. Penguin, London, UK (2003)

    2003

  128. [136]

    Canadian Acoustics 39(3), 192–193 (2011)

    Gorman, K., Howell, J., Wagner, M.: Prosodylab-aligner: A tool for forced alignment of laboratory speech. Canadian Acoustics 39(3), 192–193 (2011)

    2011

  129. [137]

    IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing 30, 135–147 (2021)

    Shahrebabaki, A.S., Salvi, G., Svendsen, T., Siniscalchi, S.M.: Acoustic-to- articulatory mapping with joint optimization of deep speech enhancement and articulatory inversion models. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing 30, 135–147 (2021)

    2021

  130. [138]

    Proceedings of the IEEE 111(10), 1355–1381 (2023)

    Triantafyllopoulos, A., Schuller, B.W., ˙Iymen, G., Sezgin, M., He, X., Yang, Z., Tzirakis, P., Liu, S., Mertes, S., Andr´ e, E., et al.: An overview of affective speech synthesis and conversion in the deep learning era. Proceedings of the IEEE 111(10), 1355–1381 (2023)

    2023

  131. [139]

    Linguistic Inquiry 39(3), 379–440 (2008)

    Hayes, B., Wilson, C.: A maximum entropy model of phonotactics and phono- tactic learning. Linguistic Inquiry 39(3), 379–440 (2008)

    2008

  132. [140]

    Computational Linguistics 27(2), 153–198 (2001) 25

    Goldsmith, J.: Unsupervised learning of the morphology of a natural language. Computational Linguistics 27(2), 153–198 (2001) 25

    2001

  133. [141]

    In: Pro- ceedings of the 14th SIGMORPHON Workshop on Computational Research in Phonetics, Phonology, and Morphology, pp

    Cotterell, R., Kirov, C., Sylak-Glassman, J., Yarowsky, D., Eisner, J., Hulden, M.: The SIGMORPHON 2016 shared task—morphological reinflection. In: Pro- ceedings of the 14th SIGMORPHON Workshop on Computational Research in Phonetics, Phonology, and Morphology, pp. 10–22 (2016)

    2016

  134. [142]

    Artificial Intelligence Review 56, 5645–5728 (2023)

    Zhang, X., Mao, R., Cambria, E.: A survey on syntactic processing techniques. Artificial Intelligence Review 56, 5645–5728 (2023)

    2023

  135. [143]

    Cognitive Computation 16, 3020–3034 (2024)

    Zhang, X., Mao, R., Cambria, E.: Granular syntax processing with multi-task and curriculum learning. Cognitive Computation 16, 3020–3034 (2024)

    2024

  136. [144]

    John Wiley & Sons, NJ, USA (2022)

    Saeed, J.I.: Semantics, 5th edn. John Wiley & Sons, NJ, USA (2022)

    2022

  137. [145]

    John Wiley & Sons, NJ, USA (2008)

    Carston, R.: Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communi- cation. John Wiley & Sons, NJ, USA (2008)

    2008

  138. [146]

    The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, 168–202 (2015)

    Potts, C.: Presupposition and implicature. The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, 168–202 (2015)

    2015

  139. [147]

    The Handbook of Pragmatics, 97–121 (2006)

    Levinson, S.C.: Deixis. The Handbook of Pragmatics, 97–121 (2006)

    2006

  140. [148]

    Searle, J.: What is a speech act? In: Philosophy in America, pp. 221–239. Routledge, NY, USA (2014)

    2014

  141. [149]

    In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol

    Speer, R., Chin, J., Havasi, C.: ConceptNet 5.5: An open multilingual graph of general knowledge. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 31 (2017)

    2017

  142. [150]

    In: The 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp

    Baker, C.F., Fillmore, C.J., Lowe, J.B.: The Berkeley FrameNet project. In: The 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 86–

  143. [151]

    International Committee on Computational Linguistics, Montreal, Canada (1998)

    1998

  144. [152]

    Cognitive Computation 16(6), 3429–3456 (2024)

    Liu, Q., Han, S., Li, Y., Cambria, E., Kwok, K.: PrimeNet: A framework for commonsense knowledge representation and reasoning based on conceptual primitives. Cognitive Computation 16(6), 3429–3456 (2024)

    2024

  145. [153]

    Information Fusion 101, 101988 (2024)

    Mao, R., He, K., Zhang, X., Chen, G., Ni, J., Yang, Z., Cambria, E.: A survey on semantic processing techniques. Information Fusion 101, 101988 (2024)

    2024

  146. [154]

    Information Fusion 114, 102712 (2025)

    Mao, R., Ge, M., Han, S., Li, W., He, K., Zhu, L., Cambria, E.: A survey on pragmatic processing techniques. Information Fusion 114, 102712 (2025)

    2025

  147. [155]

    Cognitive Computation 17(35), 1–12 (2025)

    Mao, R., Chen, G., Li, X., Ge, M., Cambria, E.: A comparative analysis of metaphorical cognition in ChatGPT and human minds. Cognitive Computation 17(35), 1–12 (2025)

    2025

  148. [156]

    Chomsky, N.: Aspects of the Theory of Syntax vol. 11. MIT Press, MA, USA 26 (2014)

    2014

  149. [157]

    Cognitive Science 35(7), 1207–1242 (2011)

    Berwick, R.C., Pietroski, P., Yankama, B., Chomsky, N.: Poverty of the stimulus revisited. Cognitive Science 35(7), 1207–1242 (2011)

    2011

  150. [158]

    Harvard University Press, MA, USA (2005)

    Tomasello, M.: Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition. Harvard University Press, MA, USA (2005)

    2005

  151. [159]

    University of Chicago Press, IL, USA (2008)

    Lakoff, G., Johnson, M.: Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press, IL, USA (2008)

    2008

  152. [160]

    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (2000)

    Reiter, E., Dale, R.: Building Natural Language Generation Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (2000)

    2000

  153. [161]

    Journal of Machine Learning Research 3(Feb), 1137–1155 (2003)

    Bengio, Y., Ducharme, R., Vincent, P., Jauvin, C.: A neural probabilistic language model. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3(Feb), 1137–1155 (2003)

    2003

  154. [162]

    In: Pro- ceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci), San Francisco, United States (2025)

    Mao, R., Wang, T., Cambria, E.: Decoding metaphors and brain signals in naturalistic contexts: An empirical study based on EEG and MetaPro. In: Pro- ceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci), San Francisco, United States (2025)

    2025

  155. [163]

    In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci), vol

    Mao, R., Zhang, T., Liu, Q., Hussain, A., Cambria, E.: Unveiling diplo- matic narratives: Analyzing United Nations Security Council debates through metaphorical cognition. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci), vol. 46. Rotterdam, the ...

    2024

  156. [164]

    Tylor, E.B.: Primitive Culture: Researches Into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Language, Art, and Custom vol. 1. Murray, London, UK (1920)

    1920

  157. [165]

    (eds.): Redefining Culture: Perspectives Across the Disciplines

    Baldwin, J.R., Faulkner, S.L., Hecht, M.L., Lindsley, S.L. (eds.): Redefining Culture: Perspectives Across the Disciplines. Routledge, NY, USA (2006)

    2006

  158. [166]

    In: The Stanford Ency- clopedia of Philosophy

    Kelly, D., De Block, A.: Culture and Cognitive Science. In: The Stanford Ency- clopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, CA, USA (2022)

    2022

  159. [167]

    PNAS Nexus 3(9), 346 (2024)

    Tao, Y., Viberg, O., Baker, R.S., Kizilcec, R.F.: Cultural bias and cultural alignment of large language models. PNAS Nexus 3(9), 346 (2024)

    2024

  160. [168]

    In: The New Social Theory Reader, pp

    Bourdieu, P.: Outline of a theory of practice. In: The New Social Theory Reader, pp. 80–86. Routledge, NY, USA (2020)

    2020

  161. [169]

    Personality and Social Psychology 27 Review 28(1), 54–80 (2024)

    Gobel, M.S., Miyamoto, Y.: Self-and other-orientation in high rank: A cultural psychological approach to social hierarchy. Personality and Social Psychology 27 Review 28(1), 54–80 (2024)

    2024

  162. [170]

    American Journal of Sociology 91(3), 481–510 (1985)

    Granovetter, M.: Economic action and social structure: The problem of embed- dedness. American Journal of Sociology 91(3), 481–510 (1985)

    1985

  163. [171]

    Psychological Review 108(2), 291– 310 (2001)

    Nisbett, R.E., Peng, K., Choi, I., Norenzayan, A.: Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review 108(2), 291– 310 (2001)

    2001

  164. [172]

    Daedalus 133(4), 55–66 (2004)

    Haidt, J., Joseph, C.: Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus 133(4), 55–66 (2004)

    2004

  165. [173]

    Annual Review of Psychology 76 (2025)

    Gray, K., Pratt, S.: Morality in our mind and across cultures and politics. Annual Review of Psychology 76 (2025)

    2025

  166. [174]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.03563 (2024)

    Mou, X., Ding, X., He, Q., Wang, L., Liang, J., Zhang, X., Sun, L., Lin, J., Zhou, J., Huang, X., et al.: From individual to society: A survey on social simulation driven by large language model-based agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.03563 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  167. [175]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.00818 (2024)

    Rossetti, G., Stella, M., Cazabet, R., Abramski, K., Cau, E., Citraro, S., Failla, A., Improta, R., Morini, V., Pansanella, V.: Y social: an LLM-powered social media digital twin. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.00818 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  168. [176]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.11826 (2024)

    Zhu, C., Cheng, Y., Zhang, J., Qiu, Y., Xia, S., Zhu, H.: Generative organiza- tional behavior simulation using large language model based autonomous agents: A holacracy perspective. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.11826 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  169. [177]

    In: NeurIPS 2024 Workshop on Open-World Agents

    Yang, Z., Zhang, Z., Zheng, Z., Jiang, Y., Gan, Z., Wang, Z., Ling, Z., Ma, M., Dong, B., Gupta, P., et al.: OASIS: Open agents social interaction simulations on one million agents. In: NeurIPS 2024 Workshop on Open-World Agents

    2024

  170. [178]

    In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, vol

    Chuang, Y.-S., Harlalka, N., Suresh, S., Goyal, A., Hawkins, R., Yang, S., Shah, D., Hu, J., Rogers, T.T.: The wisdom of partisan crowds: Comparing collective intelligence in humans and llm-based agents. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, v...

    2024

  171. [179]

    In: Ku, L.-W., Martins, A., Srikumar, V

    Li, N., Gao, C., Li, M., Li, Y., Liao, Q.: EconAgent: Large language model- empowered agents for simulating macroeconomic activities. In: Ku, L.-W., Martins, A., Srikumar, V. (eds.) Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume...

    2024

  172. [180]

    Routledge, London, UK (2003)

    Schechner, R.: Performance Theory. Routledge, London, UK (2003)

    2003

  173. [181]

    Journal 28 of Personality and Social Psychology 99(4), 683 (2010)

    Shteynberg, G.: A silent emergence of culture: the social tuning effect. Journal 28 of Personality and Social Psychology 99(4), 683 (2010)

    2010

  174. [182]

    University of California Press, CA, USA (1986)

    Blumer, H.: Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. University of California Press, CA, USA (1986)

    1986

  175. [183]

    Evolutionary Anthropology 12(3), 123–135 (2003)

    Henrich, J., McElreath, R.: The evolution of cultural evolution. Evolutionary Anthropology 12(3), 123–135 (2003)

    2003

  176. [184]

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99(7), 4436– 4441 (2002)

    Reader, S.M., Laland, K.N.: Social intelligence, innovation, and enhanced brain size in primates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99(7), 4436– 4441 (2002)

    2002

  177. [185]

    Personality and Individual Differences 169, 109969 (2021)

    Matthews, G., Hancock, P.A., Lin, J., Panganiban, A.R., Reinerman-Jones, L.E., Szalma, J.L., Wohleber, R.W.: Evolution and revolution: Personality research for the coming world of robots, artificial intelligence, and autonomous systems. Personality and Individual Differences 1...

    2021

  178. [186]

    Evolutionary Intelligence 17(3), 1245–1256 (2024)

    Alhijawi, B., Awajan, A.: Genetic algorithms: Theory, genetic operators, solu- tions, and applications. Evolutionary Intelligence 17(3), 1245–1256 (2024)

    2024

  179. [187]

    Evolutionary Computation 10(2), 99–127 (2002)

    Stanley, K.O., Miikkulainen, R.: Evolving neural networks through augmenting topologies. Evolutionary Computation 10(2), 99–127 (2002)

    2002

  180. [188]

    In: Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 3: System Demonstra- tions), vol

    Mao, R., Li, X., He, K., Ge, M., Cambria, E.: MetaPro Online: A computational metaphor processing online system. In: Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 3: System Demonstra- tions), vol. 3, pp. 127–135. Association fo...

    2023

  181. [189]

    Journal of Machine Learning Research 3(Jan), 993–1022 (2003)

    Blei, D.M., Ng, A.Y., Jordan, M.I.: Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3(Jan), 993–1022 (2003)

    2003

  182. [190]

    In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, (IJCAI-24), pp

    Mao, R., Lin, Q., Liu, Q., Mengaldo, G., Cambria, E.: Understanding pub- lic perception towards weather disasters through the lens of metaphor. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, (IJCAI-24), pp. 7394–7402. Internation...

    2024

  183. [191]

    Cognitive Computation 16, 1531–1553 (2024)

    Duong, C., Raghuram, V.C., Lee, A., Mao, R., Mengaldo, G., Cambria, E.: Neurosymbolic AI for mining public opinions about wildfires. Cognitive Computation 16, 1531–1553 (2024)

    2024

  184. [192]

    Technical report, University of Texas at Austin (2015)

    Pennebaker, J.W., Boyd, R.L., Jordan, K., Blackburn, K.: The development and psychometric properties of liwc2015. Technical report, University of Texas at Austin (2015)

    2015

  185. [193]

    American Psychologist 77(4), 525 (2022)

    Berger, J., Packard, G.: Using natural language processing to understand people 29 and culture. American Psychologist 77(4), 525 (2022)

    2022

  186. [194]

    Garland, D.: The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society vol. 77. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (2001)

    2001

  187. [195]

    Leadership & Organization Development Journal 24(5), 294–301 (2003)

    Connelly, C.E., Kelloway, E.K.: Predictors of employees’ perceptions of knowl- edge sharing cultures. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 24(5), 294–301 (2003)

    2003

  188. [196]

    European Review of Social Psychology 11(1), 223–255 (2000)

    Hogg, M.A.: Subjective uncertainty reduction through self-categorization: A motivational theory of social identity processes. European Review of Social Psychology 11(1), 223–255 (2000)

    2000

  189. [197]

    Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology 33(2), 188–208 (2002)

    Smith, P.B., Peterson, M.F., Schwartz, S.H.: Cultural values, sources of guid- ance, and their relevance to managerial behavior: A 47-nation study. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology 33(2), 188–208 (2002)

    2002

  190. [198]

    Schein, E.H.: Organizational Culture and Leadership vol. 2. John Wiley & Sons, NJ, USA (2010)

    2010

  191. [199]

    Science 332(6033), 1100–1104 (2011)

    Gelfand, M.J., Raver, J.L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L.M., Lun, J., Lim, B.C., Duan, L., Almaliach, A., Ang, S., Arnadottir, J., et al.: Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. Science 332(6033), 1100–1104 (2011)

    2011

  192. [200]

    Sensors 23(11), 5206 (2023)

    Alahi, M.E.E., Sukkuea, A., Tina, F.W., Nag, A., Kurdthongmee, W., Suwan- narat, K., Mukhopadhyay, S.C.: Integration of IoT-enabled technologies and artificial intelligence (AI) for smart city scenario: recent advancements and future trends. Sensors 23(11), 5206 (2023)

    2023

  193. [201]

    INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics 52(1), 42–55 (2022)

    Qin, H., Xiao, J., Ge, D., Xin, L., Gao, J., He, S., Hu, H., Carlsson, J.G.: JD.com: Operations research algorithms drive intelligent warehouse robots to work. INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics 52(1), 42–55 (2022)

    2022

  194. [202]

    Nikitas, A., Vitel, A.-E., Cotet, C.: Autonomous vehicles and employment: An urban futures revolution or catastrophe? Cities 114, 103203 (2021) 30

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.