First off, I don't believe them. (Incidentally, I now think my polynomial time 3-SAT solver is not going to work.)
"the machine we built is analog and hence would be scalable to very large numbers of memprocessors only in the absence of noise or using some error-correcting codes. This problem derives from the fact that in the present realization, we use the frequencies of the collective state to encode information, and to maintain the energy of the system bounded, the amplitudes of the frequencies are dampened exponentially with the number of memprocessors involved. However, this latter limitation is due to the particular choice of encoding the information in the collective state and could be overcome by using other realizations of digital memcomputing machines and using error-correcting codes. For example in (*8* <http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/6/e1500031.full#ref-8>), two of the authors (F.T. and M.D.) proposed a different way to encode a quadratic information overhead in a network of memristors that is not subject to this energy bound." Analog Computers could be used to do fast approximations but there is a cost to getting the noise out. Noise would have meaning if you could understand it and one might be able to argue that the noise in their computer is a form of np combinatorial explosion. In some ways it is similar to the problem I mentioned to Steve. My recollection is that there is a cost to using logarithms and while you could find a way to denote the significant digits of a transformation from logarithm form (exponent of some base) to the number it represents the cost to do that for chain calculations would be too great to make it practical. (Either it would take too many computations to evaluate the result or the precision of the calculation would deteriorate.) I was never very interested in stigmergy until now but I always felt that stigmergy always had something to do with a greater environment. It makes sense to say that there are more simple (or perhaps more structured) environments like the 'environment' of a mathematical problem but I always felt that some excessive simplicity would obscure the potential significance of stigmergy. But perhaps the environment of a mathematical problem is actually so complicated that it makes perfect sense to consider a mathematical solver to be a form of stigmergy. But then any function that made changes that a subsequent function acted on could be considered a stigermegy event of this sort. Jim Bromer On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 6:47 PM, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]> wrote: > How does memcomputing differ from stigmergy? > > http://phys.org/news/2015-07-memcomputer-prototype.html > <http://phys.org/news/2015-07-memcomputer-prototype.htmlhttp://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/6/e1500031.full> > > http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/6/e1500031.full > <http://phys.org/news/2015-07-memcomputer-prototype.htmlhttp://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/6/e1500031.full> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigmergy > > Kindly advise. > > ~PM > > > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/24379807-653794b5> | > Modify > <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> > Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> > ------------------------------------------- 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
