| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| public:t_720_atai:atai-21:knowledge_representation [2021/09/29 15:14] – [Symbols, Models, Syntax] thorisson | public:t_720_atai:atai-21:knowledge_representation [2024/04/29 13:33] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 |
|---|
| ==== Symbols ==== | ==== Symbols ==== |
| |
| | \\ What are Symbols? | Peirce's Theory of Semiotics (signs) proposes 3 parts to a sign: \\ **a //sign/symbol//, an //object//, and an //interpretant//**. \\ Example of symbol: an arbitrary pattern, e.g. a written word (with acceptable error ranges whose threshold determine when it is either 'uninterpretable' or 'inseparable from other symbols'. \\ Example of object: an automobile (clustering of atoms in certain ways). \\ Example of interpretant: Your mind as it experiences something in your mind's eye when you read the word "automobile". The last part is the most complex thing, because obviously what //you// see and what //I// see when we read the word "automobile" will never be exactly the same. | | | \\ What are Symbols? | Peirce's Theory of Semiotics (signs) proposes 3 parts to a sign: \\ **a //sign/symbol//, an //object//, and an //interpretant//**. \\ Example of symbol: an arbitrary pattern, e.g. a written word (with acceptable error ranges whose threshold determine when it is either 'uninterpretable' or 'inseparable from other symbols'). \\ Example of object: an automobile (clustering of atoms in certain ways). \\ Example of interpretant: Your mind as it experiences something in your mind's eye when you read the word "automobile". The last part is the most complex thing, because obviously what //you// see and what //I// see when we read the word "automobile" will never be exactly the same. | |
| | Do Symbols Carry Meaning Directly? | No. Symbols are initially meaningless arbitrary patterns, and without an interpretant they are also meaningless. \\ What gives them the ability to //carry// meaning (see below) is a mutual //contract// between two communicators (or, more strictly, and encoding-decoding process pair). | | | Do Symbols Carry Meaning Directly? | No. Symbols are initially meaningless arbitrary patterns, and without an interpretant they are also meaningless. \\ What gives them the ability to //carry// meaning (see below) is a mutual //contract// between two communicators (or, more strictly, and encoding-decoding process pair). | |
| | \\ "Symbol" | Peirce used various terms for this, including "sign", "representamen", "representation", and "ground". Others have suggested "sign-vehicle". What is meant in all cases is that a pattern that can be used to stand for something else, and thus requires an interpretation to be used as such. | | | \\ "Symbol" | Peirce used various terms for this, including "sign", "representamen", "representation", and "ground". Others have suggested "sign-vehicle". What is meant in all cases is that a pattern that can be used to stand for something else, and thus requires an interpretation to be used as such. | |
| | \\ Peirce's Innovation | Detaching the symbol/sign from the object it signified, and introducing the interpretation process as a key entity. This makes it possible to explain why people misunderstand each other, and how symbols and meaning can grow and change in a culture. | | | Peirce's Innovation | Detaching the symbol/sign from the object it signified, and introducing the interpretation process as a key entity. This makes it possible to explain why people misunderstand each other, and how symbols and meaning can grow and change in a culture. | |
| |
| \\ | \\ |
| | \\ \\ Knowledge | Knowledge is "actionable information" - information structures that can be used to //do stuff//, including \\ (a) predict (deduce), \\ (b) derive potential causes (abduce - like Sherlock Holmes does), \\ ( c) explain, and \\ (d) re-create (like Einstein did with <m>E=mc^2</m>). | | | \\ \\ Knowledge | Knowledge is "actionable information" - information structures that can be used to //do stuff//, including \\ (a) predict (deduce), \\ (b) derive potential causes (abduce - like Sherlock Holmes does), \\ ( c) explain, and \\ (d) re-create (like Einstein did with <m>E=mc^2</m>). | |
| | \\ Knowledge \\ = \\ Models | Sets of models allow a thinking agent to do the above, by \\ (a) finding the relevant models for anything (given a certain situation and active goals), \\ (b) apply them according to the goals to derive predictions, \\ ( c) selecting the right actions based on these predictions such that the goals can be achieved, and \\ (d) monitoring the outcome. \\ (Learning then results from correcting the models that predicted incorrectly.) | | | \\ Knowledge \\ = \\ Models | Sets of models allow a thinking agent to do the above, by \\ (a) finding the relevant models for anything (given a certain situation and active goals), \\ (b) apply them according to the goals to derive predictions, \\ ( c) selecting the right actions based on these predictions such that the goals can be achieved, and \\ (d) monitoring the outcome. \\ (Learning then results from correcting the models that predicted incorrectly.) | |
| | \\ What's Contained \\ in Models? | To work for creating knowledge, models must, on their own or in sets, capture in some way: \\ - Patterns \\ - Relations \\ - Volitional acts \\ - Causal chains | | | \\ What's Contained \\ in Models? | To work as building blokcs for knowledge, models must, on their own or in sets, capture in some way: \\ - Patterns \\ - Relations \\ - Volitional acts \\ - Causal chains | |
| | Where Do The Symbols Come In? | Symbols are mechanisms for rounding up model sets - they are "handles" on the information structures. \\ In humans this "rounding up" happens subconsciously and automatically, most of the time, using similarity mapping (content-driven association). | | | Where Do The Symbols Come In? | Symbols are mechanisms for rounding up model sets - they are "handles" on the information structures. \\ In humans this "rounding up" happens subconsciously and automatically, most of the time, using similarity mapping (content-driven association). | |
| | \\ Syntactic Autonomy | To enable autonomous thought, the use of symbols for managing huge sets of models must follow certain rules. For determining the development of biological agents, these rules - their syntax - must exist in form //a priori// of the developing, learning mind, because it determines what these symbols can and cannot do. In this sense, "syntax" means the "rules of management" of information structures (just like the use of symbols in human communication). | | | \\ Syntactic Autonomy | To enable autonomous thought, the use of symbols for managing huge sets of models must follow certain rules. For determining the development of biological agents, these rules - their syntax - must exist in form //a priori// of the developing, learning mind, because it determines what these symbols can and cannot do. In this sense, "syntax" means the "rules of management" of information structures (just like the use of symbols in human communication). | |
| | \\ Historical Note | Chomsky claimed that humans are born with a "language acquisition device". \\ What may be the case is that the language simply sits on top of a more general set of "devices" for the formation of knowledge //in general//. | | | \\ Historical Note | Chomsky claimed that humans are born with a "language acquisition device". \\ What may be the case is that the language simply sits on top of a more general set of "devices" for the formation of knowledge //in general//. | |
| | \\ Evolution & Cognition | Because thought depends on underlying biological structures, and because biological structure depends on ongoing maintenance processes, the syntax and semantics for creating a biological agent, and the syntax and semantics for generating meaningful thought in such an agent, both depend on //syntactic autonomy// - i.e. rules that determine how the referential processes of **encode-transmit-decode** work. | | | Evolution & Cognition | Because thought depends on underlying biological structures, and because biological structure depends on ongoing maintenance processes, the syntax and semantics for creating a biological agent, and the syntax and semantics for generating meaningful thought in such an agent, both depend on //syntactic autonomy// - i.e. rules that determine how the referential processes of **encode-transmit-decode** work. | |
| |
| \\ | \\ |
