> -----Original Message----- > From: Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI [mailto:[email protected]] > > If I understood the first part of your thought correctly; agents could be > collaborative-type of quanta forming some kind of generative frequency, > relative to the properties of the agent form? >
Well, yes having many similar agents communicating and coordinating via DNA quantum communication mimic in design and software. I know it's not determined yet how this works biologically but it doesn't have to be there is enough evidence and knowledge to work it that way and perhaps there are indications it will produce results - this model is a form of combined analog and discrete computation. Analog frequencies from discrete agents generating hybrid patterns...perhaps patterns of adaptive entropy within its operational complexity. > On the second part; each agent should be a hard-coded fractal, with the > scalability property being a replicated constant? Uhm - possible. I'm thinking agents would have complexity somewhere between that of a cellular automata and a simple unicellular organism, towards the lower end of course. Core defined by sets of mathematical tuples initially for example a finite state machine automata tuple, but having advanced dynamics of communication complexity, peer to peer, group and cluster forming capabilities...Could they be fractal based and maybe fractal based CA? I don't know. Tuples allow a vast spectra of higher order interlocking automata categories. But perhaps fractal based should be explored for the potential of recursive self-improvement. > Some type of soft-coded, management system gets all the pieces working in > the purposed direction? The structure needn't closely mimic biology, for example every agent needn't carry around it's DNA there can be a community copy. Agents might only carry changes for resource optimization. Oher biological pieces can be thrown out as not needed in software world like cell walls. And importantly a cell needn't be a "cell"... > Last, I noticed your point on "feedback". > If open-looped (probably recursive), closed-looped (probably self recursive). > To be learning, one would probably require both? The structure of individual agents should be flexible enough so that it communicates and incorporates systemic behavior. That would include feedback mechanisms. A main idea would be that it's self-organizing ability need not be biologically restricted but restricted along the lines of contemporary computer based technology. But like you say the system, aside from individual agents can be recursive that's interesting. BTW I'm just throwing around some ideas here on a complex adaptive MAS that has numerous similar agents. I'm sure there are many systems that could be built differently with just a few agents having highly specific functions or one agent with many different internal functions. I do suspect the many similar agent model could have more adaptive utility but I could be wrong I just don't know. John ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
