Skip to main content

ADA , On the road to dynamic cognition: How is Action Modeling equivalent to Biological stratification ?

It appears that the brain is a uniquely connected set of statistical processing units(SPU), functional memory storage modules that are connected via neurotransmitter mediated API like interfaces. A statistical processing unit is a processing module that emerges from connecting memory elements that have the ability to modulate output based on input and feedback up chain from output line or lines. The neurons and glial cells exhibit these properties.

In biology the action potential firing process encodes the varied information related from other contiguous neurons tasked with processing some bit of sensory information. neurotransmitters provide the API or application programming interface through which groups of neurons fire or process data in concert. Each functional module describes a set of neurons providing some processing function for a given sensory data set. The neo cortex of most mammals is separated into regions loosely devoted to processing data from the visual, auditory, somatosensory, gustatory, olfactory data sets for example. These regions emerge over time as mammalian individuals develop, as they experience new data the regions sample and process and interpret the data.

Most research in the artificial intelligence space indicates that many  have started to get the importance of the statistical  aspects of cognitive processing (Google, Boston Dynamics....) but no one understands how these disparate processing units combine to emerge a thinking machine .namely how you'd connect SPU's to emerge dynamic cognition.

The Action Delta Assessment algorithm of the Action Oriented Worflow paradigm I invented is a generalized algorithm for *emerging an SPU like function from any training data set by having ADA analyze the stratified data*, stratification is the process of fitting a data set to desired boundaries of computational importance, these are called "actions" in the paradigm and require an action modeling step.

Action modeling is done by describing a functional boundary of computational importance along a range of actions that are fixed in the system. These are then given contextual relevance to the desired functional boundary, in Action Oriented Workflow these boundaries are encapsulated by the concept of an "Entity". Entities are represented using a computer programming language (java). The next step involves identifying how a given Entity has it's unique actions (8) defined or modeled.

In biology "stratification" as I assert it, is equivalent to action modeling which is the act of taking sensory data and then processing it differently depending on which layers in the cortex are devoted to processing parts of the incoming signal (hierarchical decomposition and processing)...for example the stratification of processing in the visual field is functionally equivalent to the modeling of actions that must be performed for ADA to start doing its magic on a given data  set.

So, ADA is an emulation of the raw cortical algorithm that when trained defines functional SPU's, but is not a generator of the unique self connection of SPU's which one must have to make a dynamic cognition (a "thinking" brain) . I assert that the medulla is an spu, the hypothalamus is an spu, the neocortex is a contiguous sheet of spu modules dedicated to specific sensory processing, the amygdala are spu's devoted to emotional processing....etc. ADA is a fractal to be composed in any direction along an incoming data set to model(biology:stratify) it to any desired processing resolution.

Some believe that the self connection of biological brains also generates from a fractal seed that may be related to the cortical algorithm and in fact derive from it...I am among them. I have already identified a state diagram that I believe can emerge a working connection between SPU's designed around ADA that could emerge dynamic cognition with sufficient training data. I plan on pursuing the construction of such a system in the next few years.

Food for thought:


Popular posts from this blog

Highly targeted Cpg vaccine immunotherapy for a range of cancer


This will surely go down as a seminal advance in cancer therapy. It reads like magic:

So this new approach looks for the specific proteins that are associated with a given tumors resistance to attack by the body's T cells, it then adjusts those T cells to be hyper sensitive to the specific oncogenic proteins targeted. These cells become essentially The Terminator​ T cells in the specific tumor AND have the multiplied effect of traveling along the immune pathway of spreading that the cancer many have metastasized. This is huge squared because it means you can essentially use targeting one tumor to identify and eliminate distal tumors that you many not even realize exist.

This allows the therapy for treating cancer to, for the first time; end the "wack a mole" problem that has frustrated traditional shot gun methods of treatment involving radiation and chemotherapy ...which by their nature unfortunately damage parts of the body that are not cancer laden but …

Engineers versus Programmers

I have found as more non formally trained people enter the coding space, the quality of code that results varies in an interesting way.

The formalities of learning to code in a structured course at University involve often strong focus on "correctness" and efficiency in the form of big O representations for the algorithms created.

Much less focus tends to be placed on what I'll call practical programming, which is the type of code that engineers (note I didn't use "programmers" on purpose) must learn to write.

Programmers are what Universities create, students that can take a defined development environment and within in write an algorithm for computing some sequence or traversing a tree or encoding and decoding a string. Efficiency and invariant rules are guiding development missions. Execution time for creating the solution is often a week or more depending on the professor and their style of teaching code and giving out problems. This type of coding is devo…

AgilEntity Architecture: Action Oriented Workflow

Permissions, fine grained versus management headache
The usual method for determining which users can perform a given function on a given object in a managed system, employs providing those Users with specific access rights via the use of permissions. Often these permissions are also able to be granted to collections called Groups, to which Users are added. The combination of Permissions and Groups provides the ability to provide as atomic a dissemination of rights across the User space as possible. However, this granularity comes at the price of reduced efficiency for managing the created permissions and more importantly the Groups that collect Users designated to perform sets of actions. Essentially the Groups serve as access control lists in many systems, which for the variable and often changing environment of business applications means a need to constantly update the ACL’s (groups) in order to add or remove individuals based on their ability to perform certain actions. Also, the…