Abdelbar, A. M., and Hedetniemi, S. M. 1998. Approximating MAPS for belief networks is NP-hard and other theorems. Artificial Intelligence, 102(1), 21–38.Google Scholar

Abrahamson, K. A., Ellis, J., Fellows, M. R., and Mata, M. 1989. On the complexity of fixed-parameter problems [Extended abstract]. Pages 210–215 of: Proceedings of the 30th Annual IEEE Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’89). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press.Google Scholar

Anderson, J. R. 1987. Methodologies for studying human knowledge. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10(3), 467–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anderson, J. R. 1990. The Adaptive Character of Thought. London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Arora, S. 1998. The approximability of NP-hard problems. Pages 337–348 of: Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC’98). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Arora, S., and Barak, B. 2009. Computational Complexity: A Modern Approach. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Aucher, G., and Schwarzentruber, F. 2013. On the complexity of dynamic epistemic logic. Pages 19–38 of: Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowledge (TARK). Chennai, India: Institute of Mathematical Sciences.Google Scholar

Ausiello, G., D’Atri, A., and Protasi, M. 1981. Structure preserving reductions among convex optimization problems. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 21, 136–153.Google Scholar

Baker, C. L., Saxe, R., and Tenenbaum, J. B. 2009. Action understanding as inverse planning. Cognition, 113(3), 329–349.Google Scholar

Balasubramanian, R., Fellows, M. R., and Raman, V. 1998. An improved fixed-parameter algorithm for Vertex Cover. Information Processing Letters, 65(3), 163–168.Google Scholar

Berwick, R. C., Barton, G. E. Jr, and Ristad, E. S. 1987. Computational Complexity and Natural Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Blokpoel, M., Kwisthout, J., van der Weide, T. P., Wareham, T., and van Rooij, I. 2013. A computational-level explanation of the speed of goal inference. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 57(3), 117–133.Google Scholar

Blokpoel, M., van Kesteren, M., Stolk, A., Haselager, P., Toni, I., and van Rooij, I. 2012. Recipient design in human communication: Simple heuristics or perspective taking? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6(September), 253.Google Scholar

Blum, A. L., and Rivest, R. L. 1989. Training a 3-node neural network is NP-complete. Pages 494–501 of: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar

Blum, A. L., and Rivest, R. L. 1992. Training a 3-node neural network is NP-complete. Neural Networks, 5(1), 117–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blum, A. L., and Rivest, R. L. 1993. Training a 3-node neural network is NP-complete. Pages 9–28 of: Machine Learning: From Theory to Applications. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar

Bodlaender, H. L., van den Eijkhof, F., and van der Gaag, L. C. 2002. On the complexity of the MPA problem in probabilistic networks. Pages 675–679 of: van Harmelen, F. (ed.), Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.Google Scholar

Bolander, T., Jensen, M. H., and Schwarzentruber, F. 2015. Complexity results in epistemic planning. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI). AAAI Press/IJCAI.Google Scholar

Bruck, J., and Goodman, J. W. 1990. On the power of neural networks for solving hard problems. Journal of Complexity, 6(2), 129–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Buss, J. F., and Goldsmith, J. 1993. Nondeterminism within P. SIAM Journal on Computing, 22(3), 560–572.Google Scholar

Bylander, T. 1994. The computational complexity of propositional STRIPS planning. Artificial Intelligence, 69(1), 165–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bylander, T., Allemang, D., Tanner, M. C., and Josephson, J. R. 1991. The computational complexity of abduction. Artificial Intelligence, 49(1–3), 25–60.Google Scholar

Cai, L., Chen, J., Downey, R. G., and Fellows, M. R. 1997. Advice classes of parameterized tractability. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 84, 119–138.Google Scholar

Carruthers, P. 2005. Simple heuristics meet massive modularity. Page 24 of: Carruthers, P., Laurence, S., and Stich, S. (eds.), Culture and Cognition: The innate mind, vol. 2. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Cesati, M., and Wareham, T. 1995. Parameterized complexity analysis in robot motion planning. Pages 880–885 of: Proceedings of the 25th IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, vol. 1. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press.Google Scholar

Chalmers, D. J. 2011. A computational foundation for the study of cognition. Journal of Cognitive Science, 12(4), 323–357.Google Scholar

Chater, N., and Oaksford, M. 2000. The rational analysis of mind and behavior. Synthese, 122(1-2), 93–131.Google Scholar

Chater, N., Oaksford, M., Nakisa, R., and Redington, M. 2003. Fast, frugal, and rational: How rational norms explain behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90(1), 63–86.Google Scholar

Chater, N., Tenenbaum, J. B., and Yuille, A. 2006. Probabilistic models of cognition: Conceptual foundations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(7), 287–291.Google Scholar

Chen, J., Kanj, I. A., and Jia, W. 2001. Vertex Cover: Further observations and further improvements. Journal of Algorithms, 41(2), 280–301.Google Scholar

Chen, J., Kanj, I. A., and Xia, G. 2010. Improved upper bounds for Vertex Cover. Theoretical Computer Science, 411(40–42), 3736–3756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cherniak, C. 1986. Minimal Rationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Chickering, D. M. 1996. Learning Bayesian networks is NP-Complete. Pages 121–130 of: Learning from Data: AI and Statistics V. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar

Church, A. 1936. An unsolvable problem of elementary number theory. American Journal of Mathematics, 58(2), 345–363.Google Scholar

Clark, H. H. 1996. Using Language. vol. 4. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cobham, A. 1965. The intrinsic computational difficulty of functions. Pages 24–30 of: Bar-Hillel, Y. (ed.), Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the 1964 International Congress (Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland Publishing.Google Scholar

Cockshott, P., and Michaelson, G. 2007. Are there new models of computation? Reply to Wegner and Eberbach. The Computer Journal, 50(2), 232–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cook, S. 1971. The complexity of theorem-proving procedures. Pages 151–158 of: Proceedings of the Third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing.Google Scholar

Cooper, G. F. 1984. NESTOR: A Computer-based Medical Diagnostic Aid that Integrates Causal and Probabilistic Knowledge. Tech. rept. HPP-84-48. Stanford University.Google Scholar

Cooper, G. F. 1990. The computational complexity of probabilistic inference using Bayesian belief networks. Artificial Intelligence, 42(2), 393–405.Google Scholar

Cooper, R. P., and Peebles, D. 2017. On the relation between Marr’s levels: A response to Blokpoel. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9(2).Google Scholar

Cormen, T. H., Leiserson, C. E., Rivest, R. L., and Stein, C. 2009. Introduction to Algorithms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Cosmides, L., and Tooby, J. 1994. Origins of domain specificity: The evolution of functional organization. Pages 85–116 of: Hirschfeld, L. A., and Gelman, S. A. (eds.), Mapping the Mind. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cummins, R. C. 2000. “How does it work” versus “what are the laws?”: Two conceptions of psychological explanation. In: Keil, F., and Wilson, R. A. (eds.), Explanation and Cognition, 117–145. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Cygan, M., Fomin, F. V., Kowalik, L., Lokshtanov, D., Marx, D., Pilipczuk, M., Pilipczuk, M., and Saurabh, S. 2015. Parameterized Algorithms. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Dagum, P., and Luby, M. 1993. Approximating probabilistic inference in Bayesian belief networks is NP-hard. Artificial Intelligence, 60(1), 141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

de Haan, R. 2016, . Parameterized Complexity in the Polynomial Hierarchy. Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universität Wien.Google Scholar

Dennett, D. C. 1995. Cognitive science as reverse engineering several meanings of Top-down and Bottom-up. Pages 679–689 of: Prawitz, D., Skyrms, B., and Westerståhl, D. (eds.), Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science IX. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 134. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Deutsch, D. 1985. Quantum theory, the Church–Turing principle and the universal quantum computer. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, 400(1818), 97–117.Google Scholar

Downey, R. G., and Fellows, M. R. 1999. Parameterized Complexity. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Downey, R. G., and Fellows, M. R. 2013. Fundamentals of Parameterized Complexity. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Downey, R. G., and Fellows, M. R. 1995. Parameterized computational feasibility. Pages 219–244 of: Feasible Mathematics II. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Downey, R. G., Fellows, M. R., and Stege, U. 1999. Parameterized complexity: A framework for systematically confronting computational intractability. Pages 49–99 of: Contemporary Trends in Discrete Mathematics: From DIMACS and DIMATIA to the Future. AMS-DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 49. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar

Dry, M., Lee, M. D., Vickers, D., and Hughes, P. 2006. Human performance on visually presented Traveling Salesperson problems with varying numbers of nodes. The Journal of Problem Solving, 1(1), 20–32.Google Scholar

Dunne, P. E., Laurence, M., and Wooldridge, M. 2003. Complexity results for agent design problems. Annals of Mathematics, Computing & Teleinformatics, 1(1), 18.Google Scholar

Edmonds, J. 1965. Paths, Trees, and Flowers. Pages 361–379 of: Classic Papers in Combinatorics. Boston: Modern Birkhäuser Classics.Google Scholar

Eisner, J. 1997. Efficient generation in primitive Optimality Theory. Pages 313–320 of: Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and Eighth Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar

Eiter, T., and Gottlob, G. 1995. The complexity of logic-based abduction. Journal of the ACM, 42(1), 3–42.Google Scholar

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., and Gentner, D. 1989. The structure-mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fellows, M. R., and Langston, M. A. 1988. Nonconstructive tools for proving polynomial-time decidability. Journal of the ACM, 35(3), 727–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fellows, M. R., Pfandler, A., Rosamond, F. A., and Rümmele, S. 2012. The parameterized complexity of abduction. Pages 743–749 of: Proceedings of the 26th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI.Google Scholar

Fishburn, P. C., and LaValle, I. H. 1993. Subset preferences in linear and nonlinear utility theory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 37(4), 611–623.Google Scholar

Fishburn, P. C., and LaValle, I. H. 1996. Binary interactions and subset choice. European Journal of Operational Research, 92(1), 182–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Flum, J., and Grohe, M. 2006. Parameterized Complexity Theory. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Fodor, Jerry A. 1987. Psychosemantics: The Problem of Meaning in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D., and Law, K. 1994. MAC/FAC: A model of similarity-based retrieval. Cognitive Science, 19, 141–205.Google Scholar

Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D., Everett, J. O., and Wu, M. 1997. Towards a computational model of evaluating and using analogical inferences. Pages 229–234 of: Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Forbus, K. D., and Hinrichs, T. 2006. Companion cognitive systems: A step towards human-level AI. AI Magazine, 27(2), 83–95.Google Scholar

Forbus, K. D., and Oblinger, D. 1990. Making SME greedy and pragmatic. Pages 61–68 of: Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Fortnow, L. 2003. One complexity theorist’s view of quantum computing. Theoretical Computer Science, 292(3), 597–610.Google Scholar

Foulds, L. R. 1994. Graph Theory Applications. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar

Fraenkel, A., and Lichtenstein, D. 1981. Computing a perfect strategy for n × n chess requires time exponential in n. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 31, 199–214.Google Scholar

Frank, S. L., Haselager, W. F. G., and van Rooij, I. 2009. Connectionist semantic systematicity. Cognition, 110(3), 358–379.Google Scholar

Frixione, M. 2001. Tractable competence. Minds and Machines, 11(3), 379–397.Google Scholar

Garey, M. R., and Johnson, D. S. 1979. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. New York: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar

Gentner, D. 1983. Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155–170.Google Scholar

Gentner, D. 2003. Why we’re so smart. Pages 195–235 of: Gentner, D., and Goldin-Meadow, S. (eds.), Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Gentner, D., Lowenstein, J., Thompson, L., and Forbus, K. D. 2009. Reviving inert knowledge: Analogical abstraction supports relational retrieval of past events. Cognitive Science, 33(6), 1343–1382.Google Scholar

Gentner, D., and Forbus, K. D. 2011. Computational models of analogy. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2(3), 266–276.Google Scholar

Gibbons, A., and Rytter, W. 1988. Efficient Parallel Algorithms. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. 2008. Why heuristics work. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(1), 20–29.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., and Goldstein, D. G. 1996. Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103(4), 650–669.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., Hoffrage, U., and Goldstein, D. G. 2008. Fast and frugal heuristics are plausible models of cognition: Reply to Dougherty, Franco-Watkins, and Thomas (2008). Psychological Review, 115(1), 230–239.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., and Todd, P. M. 1999. Simple Heuristics that Make Us Smart. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M., and ABC Research Group. 2000. Simple Heuristics that Make Us Smart. Evolution and Cognition. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gould, R. 1988. Graph Theory. San Francisco, CA: Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co.Google Scholar

Grice, H. P. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Grootswagers, T. 2013. Having Your Cake and Eating It Too: Towards a Fast and Optimal Method for Analogy Derivation. MSc Thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen.Google Scholar

Gross, J. L., and Yellen, J. 1990. Graph Theory and Its Applications. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar

Grush, R., and Churchland, P. S. 1995. Gaps in Penrose’s toilings. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(1), 10–29.Google Scholar

Hahn, U., Chater, N., and Richardson, L. B. 2003. Similarity as transformation. Cognition, 87(1), 1–32.Google Scholar

Halford, G. S., Wilson, W. H., and Phillips, W. 1998. Processing capacity defined by relational complexity. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 803–831.Google Scholar

Hamilton, R., and Wareham, T. 2012, . Practical optimal-solution algorithms for schema-based analogy mapping. Pages 311–312 of: Rußwinkel, N., Drewitz, Uwe U., and van Rijn, H. (eds.), Proceedings of ICCM 2012: 11th International Conference on Cognitive Modeling. TU Berlin.Google Scholar

Haselager, P., van Dijk, J., and van Rooij, I. 2008. A lazy brain? Embodied embedded cognition and cognitive neuroscience. Pages 273–290 of: Calvo, P., and Gomila, A. (eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Science. Perspectives on Cognitive Science. San Diego, CA: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Haselager, W. F. G. 1997. Cognitive Science and Folk Psychology: The Right Frame of Mind. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Horgan, T., and Tienson, J. 1996. Connectionism and the Philosophy of Psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hüffner, F., Niedermeier, R., and Wernicke, S. 2008. Techniques for practical fixed-parameter algorithms. The Computer Journal, 51(1), 7–25.Google Scholar

Jaja, J. 1992. An Introduction to Parallel Algorithms. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Jensen, F. V., and Nielsen, T. D. 2007. Bayesian Networks and Decision Graphs. Second edn. New York: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar

Joseph, D. A., and Plantings, W. H. 1985. On the complexity of reachability and motion planning questions. Pages 62–66 of: Proceedings of the First Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry. ACM.Google Scholar

Judd, J. S. 1987. Learning in networks is hard. Pages 685–692 of: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, 1987, vol. 2. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar

Judd, J. S. 1990. Neural Network Design and the Complexity of Learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Judd, J. S. 1988. On the complexity of loading shallow neural networks. Journal of Complexity, 4(3), 177–192.Google Scholar

Kak, S. 2000. Active agents, intelligence and quantum computing. Information Sciences, 128(1), 1–17.Google Scholar

Karp, R. M. 1972. Reducibility among combinatorial problems. Pages 85–103 of: Miller, R. E., and Thatcher, J. W. (eds.), Complexity of Computer Computations. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar

Kaye, R. 2000. Minesweeper is NP-complete. The Mathematical Intelligencer, 22(4), 9–15.Google Scholar

Klapper, A., Dotsch, R., van Rooij, I., and Wigboldus, D. H. J. 2018. Social categorization in connectionist models: A conceptual integration. Social Cognition, 36(2), 221–246.Google Scholar

Kleene, S. C. 1936. General recursive functions of natural numbers. Mathematische Annalen, 112, 727–742.Google Scholar

Knuth, D. E. 1968. The Art of Computer Programming: Fundamental Algorithms. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Knuth, D. E. 1974. A terminological proposal. SIGACT News, 12–18.Google Scholar

Krueger, L. E., and Tsav, C. Y. 1990. Analyzing vision at the complexity level: Misplaced complexity? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13(3), 449–450.Google Scholar

Kruskal, J. B. 1956. On the shortest spanning subtree of a graph and the Traveling Salesman Problem. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 7, 48–50.Google Scholar

Kube, P. R. 1991. Unbounded visual search is not both biologically plausible and NP-Complete. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14(4), 768–770.Google Scholar

Kuehne, S. E., Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D., and Quinn, B. 2000. SEQL: Category learning as progressive abstraction using structure mapping. Pages 770–775 of: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J. 2009. The Computational Complexity of Probabilistic Networks. Ph.D. thesis, Faculty of Science, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J. 2011a. Most probable explanations in Bayesian networks: Complexity and tractability. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 52(9), 1452– 1469.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J. 2011b. The Computational Complexity of Probabilistic Inference. Tech. rept. ICIS–R11003. Radboud University Nijmegen.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J. 2012a. Relevancy in problem solving: A computational framework. The Journal of Problem Solving, 5(1), 18–33.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J. 2012b. Structure approximation of most probable explanations in Bayesian networks. Pages 131–138 of: Uiterwijk, J. W. H. M., Roos, N., and Winands, M. H. M. (eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Benelux Conference on Artificial Intelligence (BNAIC’12). The Netherlands: Department of Knowledge Maastricht University.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J. 2015. Tree-width and the computational complexity of MAP approximations in Bayesian networks. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 53, 699–720.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J. 2018. Approximate inference in Bayesian networks: Parameterized complexity results. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 93(Feb.), 119–131.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J., Bodlaender, H. L., and van der Gaag, L. C. 2011a. The Complexity of finding kth most probable explanations in probabilistic networks. Pages 356–367 of: Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Computer Science (SOFSEM 2011), vol. LNCS 6543. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J., and van Rooij, I. 2013. Bridging the gap between theory and practice of approximate Bayesian inference. Cognitive Systems Research, 24(Sept.), 2–8.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J., and van Rooij, I. 2018 (June). Computational resource demands of a predictive Bayesian brain. PsyArxiv preprint.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J., Wareham, T., and van Rooij, I. 2011b. Bayesian intractability is not an ailment that approximation can cure. Cognitive Science, 35(5), 779–784.Google Scholar

Kwisthout, J., Wareham, T., Haselager, P., Toni, I., and van Rooij, I. (2011). The computational costs of recipient design and intention recognition in communication. Pages 465–470 of: Carlson, L., Holscher, C., & T. Shipley, T. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar

Ladner, R. 1975. On the structure of polynomial time reducibility. Journal of the ACM, 22(1), 155–171.Google Scholar

Lauritzen, S. L., and Spiegelhalter, D. J. 1988. Local computations with probabilities on graphical structures and their application to expert systems. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 50(2), 157–224.Google Scholar

Levesque, H. J. 1989. Logic and the complexity of reasoning. Pages 73–107 of: Philosophical Logic and Artificial Intelligence. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Levinson, S. C. 2006. The human interactional engine. Pages 39–69 of: Roots of Human Sociality. Culture, Cognition and Human Interaction. Oxford, UK: Berg Publishers.Google Scholar

Lewis, H. R., and Papadimitriou, C. H. 1997. Elements of the Theory of Computation. 2nd edn. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Litt, A., Eliasmith, C., Kroon, F. W., Weinstein, S., and Thagard, P. 2006. Is the brain a quantum computer? Cognitive Science, 30(3), 593–603.Google Scholar

Markman, A. B., and Gentner, D. 2000. Structure mapping in the comparison process. The American Journal of Psychology, 113(4), 501.Google Scholar

Marr, D. 1977. Artificial intelligence: A personal view. Artificial Intelligence, 9(1), 37–48.Google Scholar

Marr, D. 1981. Vision: A Computational Investigation into the Human Representation and Processing Visual Information. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar

Martignon, L., and Hoffrage, U. 2002. Fast, frugal, and fit: Simple heuristics for paired comparison. Theory and Decision, 52(1), 29–71.Google Scholar

Martignon, L., and Schmitt, M. 1999. Simplicity and robustness of fast and frugal heuristics. Minds and Machines, 9(4), 565–593.Google Scholar

McClelland, J. L. 2009. The place of modeling in cognitive science. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 11–38.Google Scholar

Millgram, E. 2000. Coherence: The price of the ticket. The Journal of Philosophy, 97(2), 82–93.Google Scholar

Montoya, J. A., and Mller, M. 2013. Parameterized random complexity. Theory of Computing Systems, 52(2), 221–270.Google Scholar

Müller, M., van Rooij, I., and Wareham, T. 2009. Similarity as tractable transformation. Pages 50–55 of: Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar

Narayanan, A. 1999. Quantum computing for beginners. Pages 2231–2238 in: Evolutionary Computation. Proceedings of the 1999 Congress, vol. 3. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar

Newell, A., and Simon, H. A. 1961. Computer Simulation of Human Thinking. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar

Newell, A., and Simon, H. A. 1988a. GPS, a program that simulates human thought. Pages 453–460 of: Collins, A. M., and Smith, E. E. (eds.), Readings in Cognitive Science: A Perspective from Psychology and Artificial Intelligence. San Francisco, CA: Kaufmann.Google Scholar

Newell, A., and Simon, H. A. 1988b. The theory of human problem solving. Pages 453– 460 of: Collins, A. M., and Smith, E. E. (eds.), Readings in Cognitive Science: A Perspective from Psychology and Artificial Intelligence. San Francisco, CA: Kaufmann.Google Scholar

Niedermeier, R. 2006. Invitation to Fixed-Parameter Algorithms. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Niedermeier, Invi, and Rossmanith, P. 1999. Upper bounds for Vertex Cover further improved. Pages 561–570 of: STACS 99. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar

Niedermeier, Invi, and Rossmanith, P. 2000. A general method to speed up fixed-parameter-tractable algorithms. Information Processing Letters, 73(3–4), 125–129.Google Scholar

Niedermeier, Invi, and Rossmanith, P. 2003. On efficient fixed-parameter algorithms for Weighted Vertex Cover. Journal of Algorithms, 47(2), 63–77.Google Scholar

Nordh, G., and Zanuttini, B. 2008. What makes propositional abduction tractable. Artificial Intelligence, 172(10), 1245–1284.Google Scholar

Oaksford, M., and Chater, N. 1998. Rationality in an Uncertain World: Essays on the Cognitive Science of Human Reasoning. Abingdon-on-Park, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Oaksford, M., and Chater, N. 1993. Reasoning theories and bounded rationality. Pages 31–60 of: Rationality: Psychological and philosophical perspectives. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Öllinger, M., Jones, G., and Knoblich, G. 2014. The dynamics of search, impasse, and representational change provide a coherent explanation of difficulty in the nine-dot problem. Psychological Research, 78(2), 266–275.Google Scholar

Ordyniak, S., and Szeider, S. 2012. Algorithms and complexity results for exact Bayesian structure learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.3501.Google Scholar

Orponen, P. 1994. Computational complexity of neural networks: A survey. Nordic Journal of Computing, 1(1), 94–110.Google Scholar

Otworowska, M., Blokpoel, M., Sweers, M., Wareham, T., and van Rooij, I. 2018. Demons of ecological rationality. Cognitive Science, 42(3), 1057–1066.Google Scholar

Parberry, I. 1994. Circuit Complexity and Neural Networks. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Parberry, I. 1997. Knowledge, understanding, and computational complexity. Pages 125–144 of: Levine, Daniel S., and Elsberry, Wesley R. (eds.), Optimality in Biological and Artificial Networks? New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Park, J. D., and Darwiche, A. 2004. Complexity results and approximation settings for MAP explanations. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 21, 101–133.Google Scholar

Paz, A., and Moran, S. 1981. Nondeterministic polynomial optimization problems and their approximations. Theoretical Computer science, 15, 251–277.Google Scholar

Pearl, J. 1988. Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference. Palo Alto, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar

Penrose, R. 1994. Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the Missing Science of Consciousness. 1st edn. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Penrose, R. 1997. Physics and the mind. Pages 93–143 of: Longair, M. (ed.), The Large, the Small and the Human Mind. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Pizlo, Z., Stefanov, E., Saalweachter, J., Li, Z., Haxhimusa, Y., and Kropatsch, W. G. 2006. Traveling salesman problem: A foveating pyramid model. The Journal of Problem Solving, 1(1).Google Scholar

Port, R. F., and van Gelder, T. 1995. Mind as Motion: Explorations in the Dynamics of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Post, E. L. 1936. Finite combinatory processes: Formulation. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 1(3), 103–105.Google Scholar

Prasse, M., and Rittgen, P. 1998. Why Church’s thesis still holds. Some notes on Peter Wegner’s tracts on interaction and computability. The Computer Journal, 41(6), 357–362.Google Scholar

Prim, R. C. 1957. Shortest connection networks and some generalizations. The Bell System Technical Journal, 36(6), 1389–1401.Google Scholar

Pylyshyn, Z. W. 1991. The role of cognitive architectures in the theory of cognition. Pages 189–223 of: VanLehn, K (ed.), Architectures for Intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Reif, J. H. 1987. Complexity of the generalized mover’s problem. In: Schwartz, J. T., Sharis, M., and Hopcroft, J. E. (eds.), Planning, Geometry, and Complexity in Robot Motion. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar

Reiter, R. 1980. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13(1), 81–132.Google Scholar

Ristad, E. S. 1990. Computational structure of human language. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Ristad, E. S. 1992. Complexity of the simplified segmental phonology. Tech. Rept. CS-TR-388-92. Department of Computer Science, Princeton University.Google Scholar

Ristad, E. S. 1993. The Language Complexity Game. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Robere, R., and Besold, T. R. 2012. Complex analogies: Remarks on the complexity of HDTP. Pages 530–542 of: Thielscher, M., and Zhang, D. (eds.), Australasian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AI 2012). Lecture notes in Computer Science, no. 7691. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Rosch, E. H. 1973. On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. Pages 111–144 of: Moore, T. E. (ed.), Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Sanborn, A. N., Griffiths, T. L., and Navarro, D. J. 2010. Rational approximations to rational models: Alternative algorithms for category learning. Psychological Review, 117(4), 1144–1167.Google Scholar

Schmitt, M., and Martignon, L. 2006. On the complexity of learning lexicographic strategies. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 7(Jan.), 55–83.Google Scholar

Schöning, U. 1990. Complexity cores and hard problem instances. Pages 232–240 of: Algorithms, International Symposium SIGAL’90, Tokyo, Japan, August 16-18, 1990, Proceedings.Google Scholar

Schwering, A., Krumnack, U., Kühnberger, K. -U., and Gust, H. 2009. Syntactic principles of heuristic-driven theory projection. Cognitive Systems Research, 10(3), 251–269.Google Scholar

Scott, A., Stege, U., and van Rooij, I. 2011. Minesweeper may not be NP-complete but is hard nonetheless. The Mathematical Intelligencer, 33(4), 5–17.Google Scholar

Selman, B., and Levesque, H. J. 1990. Abductive and default reasoning: A computational core. Pages 343–348 of: Proceedings of the 8th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 1990).Google Scholar

Shafto, P., and Goodman, N. 2008. Teaching games: Statistical sampling assumptions for learning in pedagogical situations. Pages 1632–1637 of: Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar

Shimony, S. E. 1994. Finding MAPs for belief networks is NP-hard. Artificial Intelligence, 68(2), 399–410.Google Scholar

Shor, P. 1997. Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer. SIAM Journal on Computing, 26(5), 1484–1509.Google Scholar

Siegel, R. M. 1990. Is it really that complex? After all, there are no green elephants. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13(3), 453–453.Google Scholar

Siegelmann, H. T., and Sontag, E. D. 1994. Analog computation via neural networks. Theoretical Computer Science, 131(2), 331–360.Google Scholar

Šíma, J. 1994. Loading deep networks is hard. Neural Computation, 6(5), 842–850.Google Scholar

Šíma, J. 1996. Back-propagation is not Efficient. Neural Networks, 9(6), 1017–1023.Google Scholar

Šíma, J and Orponen, P. 2003. General-purpose computation with neural networks: A survey of complexity theoretic results. Neural Computation, 15(12), 2727–2778.Google Scholar

Simon, H. A. 1955. A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1), 99–118.Google Scholar

Simon, H. A. 1988. Rationality as process and as product of thought. Pages 58–77 of: Bell, D. E., Raiffa, H., and Tversky, A. (eds.), Decision making: Descriptive, Normative, and Prescriptive Interactions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Simon, H. A. 1990. Invariants of human behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 41(1), 1–20.Google Scholar

Sloper, C., and Telle, J. 2008. An overview of techniques for designing parameterized algorithms. The Computer Journal, 51(1), 122–136.Google Scholar

Sperber, D., and Wilson, D. 1996. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. 2nd edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Sperber, D., and Wilson, D. 2002. Pragmatics, modularity and mind-reading. Mind & Language, 17(1-2), 3–23.Google Scholar

Stege, U., and Fellows, M. 1999. An improved fixed-parameter-tractable algorithm for Vertex Cover. Tech. Rept. 318. Department of Computer Science, ETH Zurich.Google Scholar

Sweers, M. 2015. Adapting the adaptive toolbox: The computational cost of building rational behaviour. MSc thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen.Google Scholar

Sy, B. K. 1992. Reasoning MPE to multiply connected belief networks using message-passing. Pages 570–576 of: Rosenbloom, P., and Szolovits, P. (eds.), Proceedings of the Tenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Arlington, VA: AAAI Press.Google Scholar

Thagard, P. 1993. Computational tractability and conceptual coherence: Why do computer scientists believe that P≠NP? Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 23(3), 349–363.Google Scholar

Thagard, P. 2000. Coherence in Thought and Action. Reprint edn. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Thagard, P. 2003. Why wasn’t O.J. convicted? Emotional coherence in legal inference. Cognition and Emotion, 17(3), 361–383. PMID: 29715748.Google Scholar

Thagard, P. 2006. Hot Thought: Mechanisms and Applications of Emotional Cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Thagard, P. 2012. Coherence: The price is right. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 50(1), 42–49.Google Scholar

Thagard, P., and Findlay, S. 2011. Changing minds about climate change: Belief Revision, Coherence, and Emotion. Pages 329–345 of: Olsson, E. and Enqvist, S. (ed.), Belief Revision Meets Philosophy of Science. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Thagard, P., and Verbeurgt, K. 1998. Coherence as constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science, 22(1), 1–24.Google Scholar

Thelen, E., and Smith, L. 1994. A Dynamic Systems Approach to the Development of Cognition and Action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Todd, P. M., and Gigerenzer, G. 2000. Prices of simple heuristics that make us smart. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(5), 727–741.Google Scholar

Todd, P. M., and Gigerenzer, G. 2012. Ecological Rationality: Intelligence in the World. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Tsotsos, J. K. 1989. The complexity of perceptual search tasks. Pages 1571–1577 of: Sridharan, N.S. (ed.), Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.Google Scholar

Tsotsos, J. K. 1990. Analyzing vision at the complexity level. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13(3), 423–445.Google Scholar

Tsotsos, J. K. 2001. Complexity, vision, and attention. Pages 105–128 of: Harris, L., and Jenkin, M. (eds.), Vision and Attention. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Turing, A. M. 1936. On computable numbers, with an application to the entscheidungsproblem. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 42(2), 230–265.Google Scholar

van de Pol, I., van Rooij, I., and Szymanik, J. 2018. Parameterized complexity of theory of mind reasoning in dynamic epistemic logic. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 27(3), 255–294.Google Scholar

van Eijck, J., and Schwarzentruber, F. 2014. Epistemic probability logic simplified. Pages 158–177 of: Gore, R., Kool, B., and Kurucz, A. (eds.), Advances in Modal Logic. London: College Publications.Google Scholar

van Emde Boas, P. 1990. Algorithms and complexity. Pages 1–66 of: van Leeuwen, Jan (ed.), Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, vol. A. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

van Gelder, T. 1998. The dynamical hypothesis in cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21(5), 615–628.Google Scholar

van Gelder, T. 1999. Defending the dynamic hypothesis. Pages 13–22 of: Tschacher, W., and Dauwalder, J. P. (eds.), Dynamics, Synergetics, Autonomous Agents: Nonlinear Systems Approaches to Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Science. Singapore: World.Google Scholar

van Gelder, T. 1995. What might cognition be, if not computation? Journal of Philosophy, 92(7), 345–381.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I. 2003, . Tractable Cognition: Complexity Theory in Cognitive Psychology. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Psychology, University of Victoria.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I. 2007. Review of Paul Thagard (2006) “Hot thought: Mechanisms and applications of emotional coherence.” Philosophical Psychology, 20(5), 659–665.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I. 2008. The tractable cognition thesis. Cognitive Science, 32, 939–984.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I. 2012. Self-organization takes time too: Topics in cognitive science. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4(1), 63–71.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I. (2015). How the curse of intractability can be cognitive science’s blessing. In: Noelle, D. C., Dale, R., Warlaumont, A. S., Yoshimi, J., Matlock, T., Jennings, C. D., & Maglio, P. P. (Eds.) (2015). Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I., Evans, P., Müller, M., Gedge, J., and Wareham, T. 2008. Identifying sources of intractability in cognitive models: An illustration using analogical structure mapping. Pages 915–920 of: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I., Kwisthout, J., Blokpoel, M., Szymanik, J., Wareham, T., and Toni, I. 2011. Intentional communication: Computationally easy or difficult? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 5(52), 1–18.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I., Stege, U., and Kadlec, H. 2005. Sources of complexity in subset choice. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 49(2), 160–187.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I., and Wareham, T. 2008. Parameterized complexity in cognitive modeling: Foundations, applications, and opportunities. Computer Journal, 51(3), 385–404.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I., and Wareham, T. 2012. Intractability and approximation of optimization theories of cognition. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 56(4), 232–247.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I., Wright, C. D., and Wareham, T. 2012. Intractability and the use of heuristics in psychological explanations. Synthese, 187(2), 471–487.Google Scholar

van Rooij, I., Wright, C. D., Kwisthout, J., and Wareham, T. 2018. Rational analysis, intractability, and the prospects of ‘as if-explanations. Synthese, 195(2), 491–510.Google Scholar

Veale, T., and Keane, M. T. 1997. The competence of sub-optimal theories of structure mapping on hard analogies. Pages 232–237 of: Proceedings of the 15th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’97), vol. 1. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar

Wareham, T. 1999. Systematic Parameterized Complexity Analysis in Computational Phonology. Ph.D. thesis, University of Victoria.Google Scholar

Wareham, T. 2001. The parameterized complexity of intersection and composition operations on sets of finite-state automata. Pages 302–310 of: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Implementation and Application of Automata. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2088. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Wareham, T. 2017. The roles of internal representation and processing in problem solving involving insight: A computational complexity perspective. Journal of Problem Solving, 10(1), 3.Google Scholar

Wareham, T., Evans, P., and van Rooij, I. 2011a. What does (and doesn’t) make analogical problem solving easy? A complexity-theoretic investigation. Journal of Problem Solving, 3(2), 30–71.Google Scholar

Wareham, T., Kwisthout, J., Haselager, P., and van Rooij, I. 2011b. Ignorance is bliss: A complexity perspective on adapting reactive architectures. Pages 1–5 of: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Development and Learning (ICDL). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar

Wareham, T., Robere, R., and van Rooij, I. 2012, . A change for the better? Assessing the computational cost of re-representation. Pages 111–116 of: Rußwinkel, N., Drewitz, U., and van Rijn, H. (eds.), Proceedings of ICCM 2012: 11th International Conference on Cognitive Modeling. TU Berlin.Google Scholar

Wareham, T., and van Rooij, I. 2011. On the computational challenges of analogy-based generalization. Cognitive Systems Research, 12(3), 266–280.Google Scholar

Wegner, P. 1997. Why interaction is more powerful than algorithms. Communications of the ACM, 40(5), 80–91.Google Scholar

Wooldridge, M., and Dunne, P. E. 2005. The complexity of agent design problems: Determinism and history dependence. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 45(3–4), 343–371.Google Scholar

Xu, Z. -B., Hu, G. -Q., and Kwong, C. -P. 1996. Asymmetric Hopfield-type networks: Theory and applications. Neural Networks, 9(3), 483–501.Google Scholar

Yao, X. 1992. Finding approximate solutions to NP-hard problems by neural networks is hard. Information Processing Letters, 41(2), 93–98.Google Scholar