Dear Gordana and colleagues,

You are right, the concept ‘agent’ is just the abstraction of our understanding 
about the active entities which has possibility to be ‘intelligent’.
Below I remember a short text about it:

The definition of the concept "intelligence" was given in [1]. It follows from 
the “General Information Theory” [2] and especially from the “Theory of Infos” 

The intelligence is a synergetic combination of:

–      (primary) activity for external interaction. This characteristic is 
basic for all open systems. Activity for external interaction means possibility 
to reflect the influences from environment and to realize impact on the 

–      information reflection and information memory, i.e. possibility for 
collecting the information. It is clear; memory is basic characteristic of 
intelligence for “the ability to learn”;

–      information self-reflection, i.e. possibility for generating "secondary 
information". The generalization (creating abstractions) is well known 
characteristic of intelligence. Sometimes, we concentrate our investigations 
only to this very important possibility, which is a base for learning and 
recognition. The same is pointed for the intelligent system: “To reach its 
objective it chooses an action based on its experiences. It can learn by 
generalizing the experiences it has stored in its memories”;

–      information expectation i.e. the (secondary) information activity for 
internal or external contact. This characteristic means that the prognostic 
knowledge needs to be generated in advance and during the interaction with the 
environment the received information is collected and compared with one 
generated in advance. This not exists in usual definitions but it is the 
foundation-stone for definition of the concept "intelligence";

–      resolving the information expectation. This correspond to that the 
"intelligence is the ability to reach ones objectives". The target is a model 
of a future state (of the system) which needs to be achieved and corresponding 
to it prognostic knowledge needs to be "resolved" by incoming information.

In summary, the intelligence is creating and resolving the information 
expectation [1]. 

The concept "intelligence" is a common approach for investigating the natural 
and artificial intelligent agents. It is clear; the reality is more complex 
than one definition. 

Presented understanding of intelligence is important for realizations of the 
intelligent computer systems. The core element of such systems needs to be 
possibility for creating the information expectation as well as the one for 
resolving it. The variety of real implementations causes corresponded diversity 
in the software but the common principles will exist in all systems. 
Summarizing, the artificial system is intelligent if it has:

–      Activity for external interaction; 

–      Information reflection and information memory; 

–      Possibility for generalization (creating abstractions); 

–      Information expectation; 

–      Resolving the information expectation.

At the end, the five main problems of the science “Artificial Intelligence” are 
to develop more and more “smart”:

–      sensors and actuators - to realize external interaction;

–      memory structures - to learn; 

–      generalization algorithms - to make abstractions; 

–      prognostic knowledge generation - to create information expectation;

–      resolving the information expectation - to reach objectives.


1.  I. Mitov, Kr. Markov, Kr. Ivanova. The Intelligence. Plenary paper. Third 
International Scientific Conference “Informatics in the Scientific Knowledge”. 
University Publishing House, VFU “Chernorizets Hrabar”, 2010. ISSN: 1313-4345. 
pp. 7-13

2.  Kr. Markov, Kr. Ivanova, I. Mitov. Basic Structure of the General 
Information Theory. Int. Journal “Information Theories and Applications”, 
Vol.14/2007, No.:1, pp.5-19.

3.  Kr. Markov, Kr. Ivanova, I. Mitov. Theory of Infos. Int. Book Series 
"Information Science & Computing" – Book No: 13. Intelligent Information and 
Engineering Systems, Sofia, 2009, pp.9-16.

Friendly regards


From: Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic 
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 4:06 PM
Cc: Pedro C. Marijuan ; Krassimir Markov ; Joseph Brenner ; Loet Leydesdorff ; 
bob logan ; fis 
Subject: RE: FIS Information and the Eye of the Beholder

My interpretation of Krassimir’s words:

“In other words, the information is kind of reflection for which the CONCRETE 
Subject have appropriate interpretation (an evidence what is reflected). 
Subject may be a human, an animal, an electronic device, etc. i.e. natural or 
artificial entity.“

is that by “subject” Krassimir refers to an agent, animate or inanimate.


And an agent is anything with ability to act (on its own behalf).

It can be a neutron.

For a neutron electric field makes no difference.

But nuclear force can make a difference.


And of course in that picture there is always a human to make sense of 
everything, including neutrons, humans and herself (reflectively). (I think 
Loet mentioned this before).


John Collier had several good references, and the question is only (as he says) 
if we want to make this unification or not.

If yes then not only the traditional idea but also generalized notion of 
information makes good sense.


Best regards,



From: Karl Javorszky [] 
Sent: den 16 april 2013 14:56
To: Pedro C. Marijuan; Krassimir Markov; Joseph Brenner; Gordana 
Dodig-Crnkovic; Loet Leydesdorff; bob logan; fis
Subject: FIS Information and the Eye of the Beholder


As Krassimir has pointed out, the term "information" is inseparable from the 
human utilising (communicating, sending/receiving/evaluating) the information.

To say "Information is that difference that makes a difference" is like saying 
"Cookies are what produce an excellent sensation in the mouth"  or "Music is 
what enchants by fascinating".

The anthropomorphic thinking is characteristic of the so-called 
"magical-mythical" way of thinking that children learn at the age of about 4-5 
years. No abstract entity can "make" or "generate" or "produce" anything, least 
of all differences.

The differences are either there or not. They are definitely not made or 
produced by a wizard or sorcerer or aliens or green mutant informators.

For someone who is too dumb, nothing ever makes a difference; for hysterics, 
everything is incessantly over-the-top, incomparable, unique, never-heard-of, 
significant, a signal of a conspiracy.

The proposal was made in Step 12 of Learn to Count in Twelve Easy Steps to use 
the term "information" like the terms "beauty", "satisfaction", "desire" etc. 
Being informed is a property of the spectator, not of the spectaculum. 
fis mailing list

Reply via email to