Introspection : it would be possible to insert a causal inference module into an agent-based modeling program. The ABM could examine the causal conclusions emerging from the data it's generating. It seems to me that is close to what "introspection" means to me.
Frank ----------------------------------- Frank Wimberly My memoir: https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly My scientific publications: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 Phone (505) 670-9918 On Sun, Jan 26, 2020, 7:56 AM Frank Wimberly <[email protected]> wrote: > Validation: Bill Reynolds wrote a paper about inferring causal models > from observational data to validate, for example, agent based models. My > original idea was that If the same causal edges emerge as are observed in > the modeled system then that helps validate the model. Bill thought it was > better to compare the causal model with experts' opinions regarding > causation in the modeled system. Good enough. > > Reynolds, W. N., Wimberly, F. C., > > Simulation Validation Using Causal Inference Theory with > Morphological Constraints. Proceedings of the 2011 Winter Simulation > Conference, Arizona Grand Resort, December, 2011. > I mentioned this here recently and Glen asked for a copy so I sent it to > him. I look forward to his comments. > > Frank > > ----------------------------------- > Frank Wimberly > > My memoir: > https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly > > My scientific publications: > https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 > > Phone (505) 670-9918 > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 11:48 PM Pieter Steenekamp < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I would go along with Johsua Epstein's "if you did not grow it you did >> not explain it". Keep in mind that this motto applies to problems involving >> emergence. So what I'm saying is that it's in many cases futile to apply >> logic to reasoning to find answers - and I refer to the emergent properties >> of the human brain as well as to ABM (agent based modeling) software. But >> even if the problem involves emergence, it's easy for both human and >> computer logic to apply validation logic. Similar to the P=NP problem*, >> it's difficult to find the solution, but easy to verify. >> >> So my answer to "As software engineers, what conditions would a program >> have to fulfill to say that a computer was monitoring “itself" is >> simply: explicitly verify the results. There are many approaches to do this >> verification; applying logic, checking against measured actual data, >> checking for violations of physics, etc. >> >> *I know you all know it, just a refresher, The P=NP problem is one of the >> biggest unsolved computer science problems. There is a class of very >> difficult to solve problems and a class of very easy to verify problems. >> The P=NP problem asks the following: if you have a difficult to solve but >> easy to verify problem, is it possible to find a solution that is >> reasonably easy for a computer to solve. "Reasonably easy" is defined as >> can you solve it in polynomial time. The current algorithms takes >> exponential time to solve it and even for a moderate size problem that >> means more time that the age of the universe for a supercomputer to solve >> it. >> >> Pieter >> >> On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 at 23:04, Marcus Daniels <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I would say the problem of debugging (or introspection if you insist) >>> is like if you find yourself at some random place, never seen before, and >>> the task it do develop a map and learn the local language and customs. If >>> one is given the job of law enforcement (debugging violations of law), it >>> is necessary to collect quite a bit of information, e.g. the laws of the >>> jurisdiction, the sensitivities and conflicts in the area, and detailed >>> geography. In haphazardly-developed software, learning about one part of >>> a city teaches you nothing about another part of the city. In >>> well-designed software, one can orient oneself quickly because there are >>> many easily-learnable conventions to follow. I would say this >>> distinction between the modeler and the modeled is not that helpful. To >>> really avoid bugs, one wants to have metaphorical citizens that are >>> genetically incapable of breaking laws. Privileged access is kind of >>> beside the point because in practice software is often far too big to fully >>> rationalize. >>> >>> >>> >>> *From: *Friam <[email protected]> on behalf of " >>> [email protected]" <[email protected]> >>> *Reply-To: *The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < >>> [email protected]> >>> *Date: *Saturday, January 25, 2020 at 11:57 AM >>> *To: *'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' < >>> [email protected]> >>> *Subject: *Re: [FRIAM] Abduction and Introspection >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, Marcus, >>> >>> >>> >>> Am I correct that all of your examples fall with in this frame; >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I keep expecting you guys to scream at me, “Of course, you idiot, >>> self-perception is partial and subject to error! HTF could it be >>> otherwise?” I would love that. I would record it and put it on loop for >>> half my colleagues in psychology departments around the world. >>> >>> >>> >>> Nick >>> >>> Nicholas Thompson >>> >>> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology >>> >>> Clark University >>> >>> [email protected] >>> >>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Friam <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Marcus Daniels >>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 25, 2020 12:16 PM >>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < >>> [email protected]> >>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Abduction and Introspection >>> >>> >>> >>> *Nick writes:* >>> >>> >>> >>> As software engineers, what conditions would a program have to fulfill >>> to say that a computer was monitoring “itself >>> >>> >>> >>> It is common for codes that calculate things to periodically test >>> invariants that should hold. For example, a physics code might test for >>> conservation of mass or energy. A conversion between a data structure >>> with one index scheme to another is often followed by a check to ensure the >>> total number of records did not change, or if it did change that it changed >>> by an expected amount. It is also possible, but less common, to write a >>> code so that proofs are constructed by virtue of the code being compliable >>> against a set of types. The types describe all of the conditions that >>> must hold regarding the behavior of a function. In that case it is not >>> necessary to detect if something goes haywire at runtime because it is >>> simply not possible for something to go haywire. (A computer could still >>> miscalculate due to a cosmic ray, or some other physical interruption, but >>> assuming that did not happen a complete proof-carrying code would not fail >>> within its specifications.) >>> >>> A weaker form of self-monitoring is to periodically check for memory or >>> disk usage, and to raise an alarm if they are unexpectedly high or low. >>> Such an alarm might trigger cleanups of old results, otherwise kept around >>> for convenience. >>> >>> >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> ============================================================ >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >>> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
