,-   - - \# A cognitive system described by Model 3 has complex cognitive behavior. However, this complexity does not imply "mental problems". The use of the consistency functional -- a linear combination of the measures of interest and interdiction -- solves the contradiction between interest and interdiction for an idea-attractor. We can again assume that there exists a preserving threshold such that ideas-attractors having the consistency larger than this threshold must be realized in any case. It is natural to assume that the preserving threshold is essentially larger than the realization one. This threshold plays the important role in the process of the time evolution of consistency of an idea-attractor in the collector.

We can assume that the consistency-measure decreases exponentially with time (thus this quantity will very quickly become less than the realization threshold and after that this idea will disappear from the collector without any trace and hence it will be never realized). But it will be assumed that if the consistency-measure is larger than the preserving threshold then this measure will not be changed.

The main disadvantage of the cognitive system described by Model 3 is that the analyzer permits the realization of ideas which have at the same time very high levels of interest and interdiction (if the measures of interest and interdiction compensate each other in the consistency function). For example, let the consistency function be equal to the difference between the measure of interest and the measure of interdiction. Assume that the realization threshold is equal to zero. For such a brain the analyzer sends to the collector totally forbidden ideas (with measure of interdiction which is approximately equal to one) having extremely high interest (with measure of interest which is approximately equal to one) Such a behavior (a storm of cravings) can be dangerous, especially in a group of cognitive systems with a social structure. Therefore functioning of the analyzer must be based on a more complex analysis of ideas-attractors which is not reduced to the calculation of the consistency function and comparing it with the realization threshold.

## ** !* -

Suppose that a cognitive system described by Model 3 improves its brain by introducing two new thresholds: the - -  . 	and the 	**-** - . -. If for some idea-attractor its measure of interest is larger than the maximal interest threshold, then such an idea is extremely interesting. The cognitive system can not simply delete this attractor. If for some idea-attractor its measure of interest is larger than the maximal interdiction threshold, then such an idea is strongly forbidden. The cognitive system can not simply send this idea to the collector to wait for realization. We now introduce the '-  	(. These are ideas such that both measures of interest and interdiction are larger that the corresponding maximal thresholds. If an idea-attractor belongs to the domain of doubts, then the cognitive system cannot take automatically (on the basis of the value of the consistency) the decision on realization of this idea.

## / **0		-**

On the one hand, the creation of an additional block in the analyzer to perform analysis of ideas-attractors by comparing them with maximal-interest and maximal-interdiction thresholds plays the positive role. Such a brain does not proceed automatically to realizations of dangerous ideas-attractors, despite their high attraction. We recall that a brain described by Model 3 would proceed totally automatically by comparing the measure of consistency with the realization threshold. On the other hand, this step in the cognitive evolution induces mental problems for a cognitive system. In fact, the appearance of the domain of doubts in the mental space is the origin of some psychical problems and mental diseases. Let the analyser find that an idea-attractor belongs to the domain of doubts— forbidden wish (desire, impulse, experience).

11 The brain is not able neither to realize such an idea nor simply to delete it. What could a brain do in this situation? The answer to this question was given in Freud, 1962a,b: such a forbidden wish is shackled into the unconscious domain.

12