Monday, February 20, 2006
Generative Methodology Glass Bead Games
On the limits of the OWL standard à [184]
Reading material [1]
Reading material [2]
Reading material [3]
Summary of the discussion up to this point à [186]
John (K) communicated to the Rosen eforum,
Paul,
Again, my apologies for not having read through all referenced
materials as I'm
pressing a deadline, but I started on the semantic project pages. It is
very interesting and I see a strong relation to where I am headed with
function. Please clarify for me, if you will -
the semantic ontology, say the aircraft landing example, is a
representation of function, is
it not? So you are proposing an
informatics architecture where a plethora of past
"functions,"
represented by behavioral models, is stored. This builds an archive of
"experience" which is then matched with future situations to
select the
most analogous ontology to a new situation, right? We had a short
discussion on the list about how behavior is constrained and the points
were made that it is probably done relationally like this, rather than
some kind of biological calculation that we seem to be rather poor at.
Does this make sense in your view?
< end quote>
Reply
yes precisely. One can find this architecture as the core concept in the BCNGroup Roadmap. I would like the review the previous Rosen list discussion of how behavior is constrained.
In my stratified view, there are natural categories forming at two levels of organizational scale (delineated by time scale) {side note: empirical (but not theoretical) evidence for organizational scale has something to do with "pi" numbers and things like Plank's constant.} But Peter Kugler is the only one I know that can talk to this evidence. I am not sure that I have the full concept.
I believe that Judith can cite Robert Rosen precisely regarding the notion that the "category" is "stored" in the reaction chains (as in cell signal pathways). The metabolic repair cycle is looping with various levels of organization to bring "unique" phenomena in line with natural category (enforced via something that Robert called anticipation). The stratified view would have two scales of interactions entangling during the emergence of a "Process Compartment", as outlined at
http://www.bcngroup.org/area3/pprueitt/kmbook/Chapter1.htm
The entanglement occurs in real time !! during the emergence !! of a "system image" with autopoiesis. So at that moment (or duration) the metabolic repair cyclic is more concerned with an induction.. and may actually result in new natural category or unexpected migration of substrate to functional form (as will occur when the N1H5 virus "finds" its niche in the human immune system.) Note that this niche likely already "exists" it is just that the migration process has not found it yet. Our biological science is not good enough to find it either. So we have this waiting game, where the wait ends when 2 - 4 M US citizens die and the world suffers a large de-population phenomenon.
The full notions of Rosen’s true core, which is his category theory, need to be available to understand how "our immune systems" are anticipating this migration. In my opinion the paper by the Chilean group misses the mark:
http://bip.cnrs-mrs.fr/bip10/rosen.pdf
I am asking others to make communications that helps develop a interdisciplinary consensus regarding the issues related to the differences between formal systems and natural systems.
http://www.bcngroup.org/area3/pprueitt/kmbook/Chapter2.htm
is revised from
Prueitt, Paul S. (1996). Is Computation Something New?, published in the Proceedings of NIST Conference on Intelligent Systems: A Semiotic Perspective. Session: Memory, Complexity and Control in Biological and Artificial Systems. October 20-23.
But I have long ago given up on the ability to publish concepts related to modeling natural complex systems with something other than Hilbert mathematics or discrete switching networks.
I have developed a summary of conjectured position at
http://www.bcngroup.org/beadgames/generativeMethodology/186.htm
and Dick Ballard made a reply which is edited to post
http://www.bcngroup.org/beadgames/generativeMethodology/187.htm
one of the other important scholars sent a private note which I edited to post at:
http://www.bcngroup.org/beadgames/generativeMethodology/188.htm
John (K) I am encouraged by the direction you seem to want to take the conversation.