1 / 16

Workshop on Causal/Influence Networks July 2009

Workshop on Causal/Influence Networks July 2009. C.A. Hooker PhD (physics), PhD (phil.) FAHA. Autonomy = I/MR synchrony. Autonomy is important. demarcation of living systems Organisation, global constraint (not order) is fundamental grounding for agency

kaylana
Download Presentation

Workshop on Causal/Influence Networks July 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Workshop on Causal/Influence Networks July 2009 C.A. Hooker PhD (physics), PhD (phil.) FAHA

  2. Autonomy = I/MR synchrony

  3. Autonomy is important • demarcation of living systems • Organisation, global constraint (not order) is fundamental • grounding for agency • frames the evolution of intelligence and intentionality,

  4. Comparative system order • PropertySystem Kind • GASCRYSTALCELL • Internal bondsNoneRigid, passiveAdaptive, active • Directive ordering*Vweak/s Vstrong/s Mod/Vcomplex • ConstraintsNone LocalGlobal • OrganisationNoneNoneVery high • * Directive ordering is spatio-temporally selective energy flow

  5. Autonomous Agents [AAs] AA interrelations are grounded in autonomy, → SDAL: • Self-directed (= feedback-evaluated behavioural adaptation) • Anticipative (= feedforward on evaluation) • Learning (= feedback-evaluated adaptation of self-directedness) AAs are finite, → uncertainty, heuristics, satisficing

  6. SDAL Example: detective • Synergy between profile development and investigation method → simultaneously moves itself towards its goal and improves its capacity to move towards its goal. • Solves open problems: ill defined = problem, method, solution criteria [all deep design problems] • Captures science research cycles • E.g. ape language research • Adaptive method, e.g. error treatment • Captures integrated modelling & management method

  7. SDAL and scientific niche creation • Key to scientific progress is its capacity for synergistic new multiplexed niche creation. • Cf. Lasers as distance/time measuring, imaging, energy-transferring devices, and impact on sci. instruments, methods & models + economic technologies with $ feedback to sci. • Sci. SDAL: sci. uses its new niches, created from specific problem solutions, to improve its learning capacity. • e.g. observation → context dependence, many weak bonds, idiosyncrasy (curbs current network enthusiasm) Contrast military constraints?

  8. Evolution of endogenous regulation • Darwinian model: ‘Transparent phenotype’ Open VSR → regulated VSR • Autonomous Systems Model: Organised Phenotypes

  9. The major organisational evolutionary transitions LIFE’S CONSTRAINTS [SUFFER!] • FINITUDE + FALLIBILITY • DISSPATIVENESS + DELICACY LIFE’S SOLUTION [ORGANISE!] • AUTONOMY • ANTICIPATIVENESS • APTNESS • ADAPTIVENESS LIFE’S BELL’S & WHISTLES [ENJOY!] • SOCIALITY • SELF-DIRECTEDNESS • AGENCY • INTELLIGENCE • CULTURE

  10. Enabling constraints for adaptiveness • Communal Social • adaptiveness Insects • dominates • Multicellular • Body Cultures • Chimpanzee • Bonobo • Human • Social • Birds • Slime Moulds • Individual • adaptiveness A-social • Dominate Organisms • 0 1 2 • Ratio of usable individual parametric plasticity between isolate and communal states.

  11. Culture: technology Technologies are amplifiers Technology as culture = technology as a-cultural: • Objects, methods/tools, possibilities, language common across diverse agents • Each group and agent exploits idiosyncratic possibilities context-dependently Example – computers in markets • Import (tech) ≈ possibilities, agent range, access Tech as kth order culture = tech as < kth order a-cultural • music, fashion as cultural technologies • language as head-altering tool = technology

  12. Culture as dynamical • Technologies as dynamical entrainments in a rugged entrainment landscape • Institutions as self-organised emergents: Hayek to Lansing to Shi Modelling • genetic Darwinism: bioevolution :: memes: cultural dynamics [Dawkins: Jablonka/Lamb :: Blackmore: ?] • Rubber sheets & oscillators: shaped/shaping • Agency, idiosyncrasy & coherence limits (e.g. control functions, Woese on gene sharing) Military culture: Centralised →? Technologies?

  13. Some proto-cultural dynamical distinctions I SHMO: simple harmonic oscillator. DCC: dynamically collective constraint. Model 1: a set of independent SHMOs. • System state = aggregate of individual states. • No DCCs. All collective phenomena are patterns determined only by initial (or boundary) conditions. • Social example: the distribution of objects in refuse.

  14. Some proto-cultural dynamical distinctions II • Model 2: model 1 + small, local pair-wise interactions between SHMOs. • System state = perturbation of model 1 state by addition of local pair-wise corrections. • Weak local DCCs responsible for collective wave-like perturbation propagation. • For increased interaction strength &/or less local interaction, stronger &/or more global DCCs emerge generating further collective phenomena, e.g. entrainment, chaotic behaviour. • Social example: pair-wise reflex interaction behaviour.

  15. Some proto-cultural dynamical distinctions III • Model 3: model 2 + interactions modified by SHMO integrative memory. • System state = joint product of SHMO states and interaction states. Memory is some function of past interactions and constrains current interaction form and strength. • Emergence of global DCCs constraining SHMO behaviour in relation to collective properties. • Social example: pre-recording socially referenced behaviours.

  16. Some proto-cultural dynamical distinctions IV • Model 4: model 3 + integrative memory referenced to a shared global field. • System state = joint product of SHMO states, interaction states, and field state. Field interacts locally with all SHMOs (realised, e.g., by a rubber sheet to which they are attached or an electromagnetic field which their movements collectively generate). • Emergence of strong global DCCs constraining SHMO behaviour in relation to collective properties based on inherent field dynamics. • Social example: socially recorded referenced behaviours.

More Related