Mathematical modeling of decision-making processes in cognitive science
Rohit P Jadhavrpjadhav@dypcoeakurdi.ac.inDepartment of Robotics and AutomationD. Y. Patil College of EngineeringPune, Maharashtra, 411044, IndiaView full profile → , *Deepak PandeyCorresponding authordeepak.pandey@rungta.orgDepartment of Computer Science and EngineeringRungta College of Engineering and TechnologyRungta International Skills UniversityBhilai, Chhattisgarh, 490024, IndiaView full profile → , Ergashev Nuriddinfinaledition2@mail.ruDepartment of Information Systems and TechnologiesKarshi State Technical UniversityKarshi, 180100, UzbekistanView full profile → , Pulatova Shaxzodapulatova.shaxzoda@bsmi.uzDepartment of Surgical DentistryBukhara State Medical InstituteBukhara, 200126, UzbekistanView full profile → , Dildora Abdumadjidovadildora0308@gmail.comDepartment of PsychologyNational University of UzbekistanTashkent, 100174, UzbekistanView full profile → , Pawan Wawagepawan.wawage@vit.eduDepartment of Information TechnologyVishwakarma Institute of TechnologyPune, Maharashtra, 411037, IndiaView full profile → , A Phani Bhaskarapbhaskar@outlook.comDepartment of Mechanical EngineeringPragati Engineering CollegeSurampalem, Andhra Pradesh, 533437, IndiaView full profile →
* Corresponding author · click or hover a name for details
- Received:
- 01 Apr 2026
- Published Online:
- 27 Oct 2026
- Article type:
- Research Article
- Language:
- EN
- Article no.:
- JIM-2826
- Pages:
- 3149–3159
Abstract
Decision-making is a basic cognitive function that includes alternative assessment, the incorporation of information and choosing an appropriate action when uncertainty exists. In this study, the mathematical modeling framework of differential equations and computational methods are used to analyze the decision making process in cognitive science. The proposed model accounts for interactions between cognitive parameters, such as stimulus strength, evidence accumulation, evidence threshold, memory influence and uncertainty about the decision. Temporal dynamics of cognitive states are mathematically described and behavioural reaction is predicted. Sensitivity analysis is used to assess the impact of the important parameters on the decision making process, and numerical techniques are used to give approximate solutions for the complicated dynamics of the model. A computational algorithm is designed to predict systematically decisions made under different cognitive conditions. The results of the simulations show the impact of the parameter variations on decisions accuracy, response behaviour and convergence behaviour. The framework offers a quantitative method of understanding cognitive mechanisms, and can be used to facilitate computational investigations of human decision behaviour under various experimental conditions.
Keywords
Subject Classifications
References
[1] S. Xie, C. Gan, and A. T. Lawniczak, “Analyzing decision-making in cognitive agent simulations using generalized linear mixed-effects models,” Mathematics, vol. 12, no. 23, Art. no. 3768 (2024), doi: 10.3390/math12233768.
[2] R. Ovodenko and A. Kouropatov, “Cognitive obstacles in engineering students’ mathematical modeling of derivatives: Insights from Skippy, Switcher, and Floater,” Education Sciences, vol. 15, no. 11, Art. no. 1485 (2025), doi: 10.3390/educsci15111485.
[3] J. Zhang, Y. Zhou, B. Jing, Z. Pi, and H. Ma, “Metacognition and mathematical modeling skills: The mediating roles of computational thinking in high school students,” Journal of Intelligence, vol. 12, no. 6, Art. no. 55 (2024), doi: 10.3390/jintelligence12060055.
[4] G. Hochman, “Beyond the surface: A new perspective on dual-system theories in decision-making,” Behavioral Sciences, vol. 14, no. 11, Art. no. 1028 (2024), doi: 10.3390/bs14111028.
[5] G. Petkov, “Symptom-based contextual models of cognition and judgment for resolving biased decision making under uncertainty,” Entropy, vol. 28, no. 6, Art. no. 623 (2026), doi: 10.3390/e28060623.
[6] M. A. Alves, I. R. Meneghini, A. Gaspar-Cunha, and F. G. Guimarães, “Machine learning-driven approach for large scale decision making with the analytic hierarchy process,” Mathematics, vol. 11, no. 3, Art. no. 627 (2023), doi: 10.3390/math11030627.
[7] M. Möller, M. Winter, and M. Reichert, “Cognitive factors in process model comprehension—A systematic literature review,” Brain Sciences, vol. 15, no. 5, Art. no. 505 (2025), doi: 10.3390/brainsci15050505.
[8] A. Hassannejad Nazir, J. Hellgren Kotaleski, and H. Liljenström, “A neurocomputational model of observation-based decision making with a focus on trust,” Brain Sciences, vol. 16, no. 5, Art. no. 477 (2026), doi: 10.3390/brainsci16050477.
[9] D. Novikov, “Models of strategic decision-making under informational control,” Mathematics, vol. 9, no. 16, Art. no. 1889 (2021), doi: 10.3390/math9161889.
[10] M. Pruthi, A. K. Yadav, and P. Soni, “Quantum synchronizable codes through generalized cyclotomy of order 2r over Z2n,” Journal of Interdisciplinary Mathematics, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 2205–2216 (2026), doi: 10.47974/JIM-2382.
[11] H. Taherdoost, “Deep learning and neural networks: Decision-making implications,” Symmetry, vol. 15, no. 9, Art. no. 1723 (2023), doi: 10.3390/sym15091723.
[12] H.-Y. Sun, Y.-T. Xiao, and S.-S. Yang, “The group intertemporal decision-making process,” Behavioral Sciences, vol. 14, no. 9, Art. no. 815 (2024), doi: 10.3390/bs14090815.
[13] T. Tanaka, “A discrete time Markov decision process under a fractional discounted reward criterion,” Journal of Information and Optimization Sciences, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 1237–1247 (2026), doi: 10.47974/JIOS-1329.
[14] F. Bizzarri, C. Mocenni, and S. Tiezzi, “A Markov decision process with awareness and present bias in decision-making,” Mathematics, vol. 11, no. 11, Art. no. 2588 (2023), doi: 10.3390/math11112588.
