1 / 8

Cognitive Computing

Cognitive Computing. Consciousness and Computation Advanced topics in Cognitive Computation Lent term assignments Mark Bishop. Consciousness and Computations. Formative (30%)

morna
Download Presentation

Cognitive Computing

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. Cognitive Computing Consciousness and Computation Advanced topics in Cognitive Computation Lent term assignments Mark Bishop

  2. Consciousness and Computations • Formative (30%) • Prove that the machine NORMA_STACK is no more powerful than the universal machine NORMA by designing two MACROs to implement: • (a) X=POP which removes the top value from the STACK and places it into the X register;(b) PUSH (X) which places the contents of the X register on to the top of the STACK; • and submit a short (no more than 1-page) report detailing their operation. • Summative (70%) • A 3000 word researched essay, “An introduction to Wiedermann and Leeuwen’s ‘Autopoietic Automata’ (AA) theory” (submitted by 5pm, Friday 22nd March, 2013). • It is anticipated that – at minimum - student essays will address: • (a) the Turing model of computation; • (b) the Interaction model of computation • (c) what is an AA? • (d) what is the relation of AAs to other models of computation (e.g. Turing machines, Interaction machines etc.); • (e) what is the computational power of an AA; • (f) the implications [if any] of AA (and more generally the interactive model) for cognitive science.

  3. References • Amongst other sources students are recommended to consult: • Jan van Leeuwen & Jirı Wiedermann (2001): Beyond the Turing Limit: Evolving Interactive Systems. In: Leszek Pacholski & Peter Ruzicka, editors: SOFSEM 2001: Theory and Practice of Informatics, 28th Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Informatics Piestany, Slovak Republic, November 24 - December 1, 2001, Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2234. Springer, pp. 90–109. Available at: http://link.springer.de/link/service/series/0558/bibs/2234/22340090.htm. • Jan van Leeuwen & Jirı Wiedermann (2001): The Turing machine paradigm in contemporary computing. In: B. Enquist & W. Schmidt, editors: Mathematics Unlimited — 2001 and Beyond. Springer-Verlag, p. 1139-1155. • Peter Verbaan, Jan van Leeuwen & Jiri Wiedermann (2004): Complexity of Evolving Interactive Systems. In: Juhani Karhumaki, Hermann A. Maurer, Gheorghe Paun & Grzegorz Rozenberg, editors: Theory Is Forever, Essays Dedicated to Arto Salomaa on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3113. Springer, pp. 268–281. Available at: http://springerlink.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article&issn=0302-9743&volume=3113&spage=268. • Jiri Wiedermann (2007): Autopoietic automata: Complexity issues in offspring-producing evolving processes. Theor. Comput. Sci. 383(2-3), pp. 260–269.

  4. Advanced topics in Cognitive Computation • Formative (30%): • Two summary and two background seminars on chapter(s) from Aleksander, I. & Morton, H., (2012), ‘Aristotle’s Laptop: the discovery of our informational mind’, World Scientific. • Summative (70%) • (a) A mini (~500) word review ‘Aristotle’s Laptop: the discovery of our informational mind’, World Scientific (the best short review to be submitted for publication in AISBQ magazine). • (b) A more in-depth (~2000 word) researched review of the work as a whole (the best in depth review to be submitted for publication in Cognitive Computation journal) • Both reviews to be submitted by 5pm, Friday 22nd March, 2013; at a minimum both reviews should discuss: (a) what is the core thesis of the text and (b) is this thesis convincing. The second (extended) review should also: (a) identify and outline the relationship of the text to other key works in the field and (b) offer at least some [critical] analysis of the ideas.

  5. Seminar lists • C2/Week 2: Stephen summary; Emily background • C3/Week 3: Asei summary; Monica background • C4/Week 4: Monica summary; Asei background • C5/Week 5: Emily summary; Stephen background READING WEEK • C6/Week 7: Anna summary; Emily background • C7/Week 8: Monica summary; Asei background • C8/Week 9: Emily summary; Monica background • C9/Week 10: Asei Summary; Stephen background • C10/Week 11: Stephen summary; Anna REVIEW

  6. Research project and Dissertation • The research project is a substantial software implementation in the broad area of Cognitive Computing. • The project aims to allow students to put into practice some of the newly acquired cognitive computing techniques on either a technical implementation - for example the use of AI or Neural Networks in a computer game - or an experimental investigation of some cognitive phenomena (e.g. change blindness). • Selection of an appropriate research project is one aspect of the assessment process.

  7. Requirements • Students implement a Cognitive Computing project and dissertation, which should include a suitable literature search of the research area, emphasising the methodological aspects of the work. • Students should select their project during terms one and two, by liaising with potential research supervisors (check out faculty web pages for research interests) and submit a project form (indicating project supervisors) by the end of term two (the form is provided in the course handbook). • This is a formal requirement for progression; if the project form has not been submitted, then the student will not be allowed to progress to dissertation.

  8. Length etc. • During the third term students should make arrangements to meet with their project supervisor on at least four occasions: twice at the start of the project (to introduce the project; confirm key project questions and strategy etc) and twice towards the end of term three (to confirm the thesis outline; demonstrate any project work and/or highlight key experimental findings; review answers to research questions; demonstrate an appropriate academic writing writing style etc). • The course is primarily assessed via a substantial 15-20,000 word dissertation together with an appropriate software implementation and/or series of experiments. • Research only projects can be considered in exceptional circumstances. • The dissertation must be completed by the end of the third term (20rd September 2013).

More Related