Research

Paper

TESTING March 23, 2026

AI Mental Models: Learned Intuition and Deliberation in a Bounded Neural Architecture

Authors

Laurence Anthony

Abstract

This paper asks whether a bounded neural architecture can exhibit a meaningful division of labor between intuition and deliberation on a classic 64-item syllogistic reasoning benchmark. More broadly, the benchmark is relevant to ongoing debates about world models and multi-stage reasoning in AI. It provides a controlled setting for testing whether a learned system can develop structured internal computation rather than only one-shot associative prediction. Experiment 1 evaluates a direct neural baseline for predicting full 9-way human response distributions under 5-fold cross-validation. Experiment 2 introduces a bounded dual-path architecture with separate intuition and deliberation pathways, motivated by computational mental-model theory (Khemlani & Johnson-Laird, 2022). Under cross-validation, bounded intuition reaches an aggregate correlation of r = 0.7272, whereas bounded deliberation reaches r = 0.8152, and the deliberation advantage is significant across folds (p = 0.0101). The largest held-out gains occur for NVC, Eca, and Oca, suggesting improved handling of rejection responses and c-a conclusions. A canonical 80:20 interpretability run and a five-seed stability sweep further indicate that the deliberation pathway develops sparse, differentiated internal structure, including an Oac-leaning state, a dominant workhorse state, and several weakly used or unused states whose exact indices vary across runs. These findings are consistent with reasoning-like internal organization under bounded conditions, while stopping short of any claim that the model reproduces full sequential processes of model construction, counterexample search, and conclusion revision.

Metadata

arXiv ID: 2603.22561
Provider: ARXIV
Primary Category: cs.AI
Published: 2026-03-23
Fetched: 2026-03-25 06:02

Related papers

Raw Data (Debug)
{
  "raw_xml": "<entry>\n    <id>http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.22561v1</id>\n    <title>AI Mental Models: Learned Intuition and Deliberation in a Bounded Neural Architecture</title>\n    <updated>2026-03-23T20:44:38Z</updated>\n    <link href='https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.22561v1' rel='alternate' type='text/html'/>\n    <link href='https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.22561v1' rel='related' title='pdf' type='application/pdf'/>\n    <summary>This paper asks whether a bounded neural architecture can exhibit a meaningful division of labor between intuition and deliberation on a classic 64-item syllogistic reasoning benchmark. More broadly, the benchmark is relevant to ongoing debates about world models and multi-stage reasoning in AI. It provides a controlled setting for testing whether a learned system can develop structured internal computation rather than only one-shot associative prediction. Experiment 1 evaluates a direct neural baseline for predicting full 9-way human response distributions under 5-fold cross-validation. Experiment 2 introduces a bounded dual-path architecture with separate intuition and deliberation pathways, motivated by computational mental-model theory (Khemlani &amp; Johnson-Laird, 2022). Under cross-validation, bounded intuition reaches an aggregate correlation of r = 0.7272, whereas bounded deliberation reaches r = 0.8152, and the deliberation advantage is significant across folds (p = 0.0101). The largest held-out gains occur for NVC, Eca, and Oca, suggesting improved handling of rejection responses and c-a conclusions. A canonical 80:20 interpretability run and a five-seed stability sweep further indicate that the deliberation pathway develops sparse, differentiated internal structure, including an Oac-leaning state, a dominant workhorse state, and several weakly used or unused states whose exact indices vary across runs. These findings are consistent with reasoning-like internal organization under bounded conditions, while stopping short of any claim that the model reproduces full sequential processes of model construction, counterexample search, and conclusion revision.</summary>\n    <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='cs.AI'/>\n    <published>2026-03-23T20:44:38Z</published>\n    <arxiv:primary_category term='cs.AI'/>\n    <author>\n      <name>Laurence Anthony</name>\n    </author>\n  </entry>"
}