Thursday, September 09, 2004
Science of human
concept measurement
and
Communication connectivity via Orb notation
(Material copied from [102] and edited
into a short paper.)
This paper was communicated
by fax to Senator Robert Bird’s Office
9/9/2004 1:21 PM
We
formally use the abstract representation of an empirically derived
substructural semantics.
These abstract representations are encoded into a universal format,
where non-interoperability is not possible, no matter how much private economic
gain is at stake.
Once in the Orb encoding any type of associational theory, or data
mining process, can be easily developed in a way that is not proprietary but
which works with well-known scholarship in computational algorithms and for
which extensive tutorials are available.
As a consequence, a universal ontology can be observed between these
elements and the occurrence of subject indicators that are used in social
discourse. This universal ontology is
formative, differential in context and has no deductive inferences, and thus no
need for long chains of questionable algorithmic processing.
The Knowledge Sharing Foundation
If the Nation is to address the informational needs required because of the presence of an asymmetric threat, an commonly discussed understanding about the “science” of “human concept measurement” is needed.
The measurement of concepts can be usefully compared with the measurement of quantum mechanical “states”. From quantum mechanics, we know that the measurement of quantum mechanical events has a tendency to perturb the thing measured. In the theory of stratified physical processes, a general rule is conjectured. The difficulty in measurement is due, in part, to the actions that “cross-scale” measurement makes across an organizational level, from one level of physical organization to a different level of physical organization.
The experience of concepts is subjective, and we humans are not fully aware of how the experience comes about. Nor is the individual fully aware of the consequences of a mental experience. Such awareness would require the anticipation of the future based on a full objective understanding of all of the various processes involved in the evolution of the present moment into a future moment. Nature does not provide us with such understanding.
Now it must be stated that the anticipatory web technology mirrors what cognitive neuroscientists have made into objective scholarship regarding the nature of human memory, awareness, and anticipation. The planning community for the National Project proposes building out an Internet-base infrastructure with a computer architecture that mirrors this natural science.
Specifically the social/political issues are addressed in the presentation:
Stratified complexity and the
origin of events
The technology is discussed, also extensively in various beads.
Stratified (Orbs) Ontology referential bases
Empirical science allows us to conjecture that the root of any specific concept is not something that exists in the normal notion of “existing”. This conjecture follows the work by Hameroff, Penrose and others who look for a full physical theory of mental function. (see also Hameroff’s paper) There is a controversy about this type of work.
The controversy surrounding Penrose and Hameroff is a philosophical one, and our work on the measurement of substructural ontology for human social discourse is grounded in a process of observation within a theoretical framework that has become explicate. (see, for example Notational Paper) We seek to move beyond the controversy and the way we see to do this is to use the very best natural science.
By “root” we mean “how the concept comes about”, not simply as one person’s experience as one person, but as part of the real phenomenon that becomes involved in the full acts of human communication. We mean, properly stated, the “ontological root” of an experienced concept.
We could say that the root is a “pragmatic root” and only exists in the present moment. Abstractions allow a computer based representation of these roots to be developed and then to be used to identify, categorize and order concepts being expressed in the real time measurement of the social discourse. The computer based representation also always has a mathematics like notational formulation that allows a separate discussion about the over all formalism. This formalism is based in set theory and category theory.
The representations of ontological roots have the deeper qualities that grounded notions about natural ontology have, but which the notion of machine ontology is often missing.
The issue of long-term structural inhibition of a proper science of conceptual measurement cannot be avoided and has to be addressed directly in a National Project designed to establish a K-12 curriculum in the knowledge sciences.
We estimate that approximately 1/6 ($300 million per year) of the current programmed direct federal funding for academic computer science would fund the National Project.
The long process, through which Ewell and Adi developed their substructural semantics, has a framework where representations about roots of concepts can be automatically generated from the “measured elements”, in this case, web harvests (See Readware Provenance ™ PowerPoint). This is done reasonably well, but not perfectly. For example, quasi-axiomatic theory provides a qualitative structure function analysis (Q-SAR) that allows the prediction of function of compound given partial knowledge of composition of substructure.
The Orb encoding assists in the presentation of derived subject matter indicators for humans to observe and experience. The root of the concept exists in situational context. In the Provenance ™ software, the measurement of the occurrence of concepts in real time uses instrumentation, encoding of some data into some data structure, and the interpretation of this structure by human observation.
Stratification theory provides a notational basis to architecture that we expect to use to encode various substructural ontologies into Orbs. Each of these substructural ontologies will be similar, in construction, to that which was produced by Ewell and Adi and encoding into the Readware products.
Science is a balance between empirical observations and theoretical constructions. Ewell and Adi developed a specific set of mappings from a 4x8 framework to a set of 2300 “lexical tokens”, having the form of letter triples or in some rare cases 4 letters. This mapping is similar, but different, from the classical “text-understanding” techniques that use word stemming.
We feel that a general methodology might be developed that uses the play between theory and experiment to produce situational substructural ontology. (see bead [103] à )
We should be clear that we mean that substructural ontology might be developed for any class of systems that exists as transient structure far from thermodynamical equilibrium. Specifically social discourse by terrorism cells is one possible object of investigation, and a special project in one of the agencies has been talked about in this regard. (But there is internal opposition to doing this.)
The Conjecture on Stratification implies a strong form of stability to the substructural ontology. Thus the development of different substructural ontology presents an interesting challenge to the Conjecture.
The collapse of the set of significant words, after modifications, into the elements of the set of semantic primitives is fixed by the assumption that the identification of the elements from the set of semantic primitives are fixed due to the long term re-enforcements of the categories through human use of language.
This is the Conjecture on Stratification.