Exploring Complexity: Von Artificial Life und Artificial Intelligence zu Cyberphysical Systems

2015 ◽  
pp. 185-212
Author(s):  
Klaus Mainzer
2012 ◽  
pp. 1314-1329
Author(s):  
Giovanni Vincenti ◽  
James Braman

Emotions influence our everyday lives, guiding and misguiding us. They lead us to happiness and love, but also to irrational acts. Artificial intelligence aims at constructing agents that can emulate thinking processes, but artificial life still lacks emotions and all the consequences that come from them. This work introduces an emotionally aware framework geared towards multi-agent societies. Basing our model on the shoulders of solid foundations created by pioneers who first explored the coupling of emotions and agency, we extend their ideas to include inter-agent interaction and virtual genetics as key components of an agent’s emotive state. We also introduce possible future applications of this framework in consumer products as well as research endeavors.


Author(s):  
Daniel M. Dubois ◽  
Stig C. Holmberg

A survey of the Varela automata of autopoiesis is presented. The computation of the Varela program, with initial conditions given by a living cell, is not able to self-maintain the membrane of the living cell. In this chapter, the concept of anticipatory artificial autopoiesis (AAA) is introduced. In this chapter, the authors present a new algorithm of the anticipatory artificial autopoiesis, which extend the Varela automata. The main enhancement consists in defining an asymmetric membrane of the artificial lining cell. The simulations show the anticipatory generation of artificial living cells starting with any initial conditions. The new concept of anticipatory artificial autopoiesis is related to artificial life (Alife) and artificial intelligence (AI). This is a breakthrough in the computational foundation of autopoiesis.


Entropy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. 1163
Author(s):  
Andrea Roli ◽  
Stuart A. Kauffman

Since early cybernetics studies by Wiener, Pask, and Ashby, the properties of living systems are subject to deep investigations. The goals of this endeavour are both understanding and building: abstract models and general principles are sought for describing organisms, their dynamics and their ability to produce adaptive behavior. This research has achieved prominent results in fields such as artificial intelligence and artificial life. For example, today we have robots capable of exploring hostile environments with high level of self-sufficiency, planning capabilities and able to learn. Nevertheless, the discrepancy between the emergence and evolution of life and artificial systems is still huge. In this paper, we identify the fundamental elements that characterize the evolution of the biosphere and open-ended evolution, and we illustrate their implications for the evolution of artificial systems. Subsequently, we discuss the most relevant issues and questions that this viewpoint poses both for biological and artificial systems.


2010 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 88-102
Author(s):  
S. D. Noam Cook ◽  

Since the middle of the 20th century there has been a significant debate about the attribution of capacities of living systems, particularly humans, to technological artefacts, especially computers—from Turing’s opening gambit, to subsequent considerations of artificial intelligence, to recent claims about artificial life. Some now argue that the capacities of future technologies will ultimately make it impossible to draw any meaningful distinctions between humans and machines. Such issues center on what sense, if any, it makes to claim that gadgets can actually think, feel, act, live, etc. I outline this debate and offer a critique of its persistent polarization. I characterize two of the debate’s major camps (associated roughly with Turing and Searle); argue that the debate’s structure (including key assumptions inherent to each camp) precludes resolution; and, contend that some central clashes within the debate actually stem from an inadequately drawn distinction between claims about the capacities of artifacts and claims about the proper criteria for assessing such attributions. I offer a different perspective in which I: challenge some central elements of the debate that contribute to its perennially irresolvable state; hold that the debate needs to be placed more squarely in sync with how we in fact treat the attribution of such capacities to humans themselves; and, offer (unlike the other two camps) a foothold for making moral assessments of such proposed technologies.


2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo R. Miranda ◽  
Duncan Williams

Artificial Intelligence is a rich and still-developing field with a number of musical applications. This paper surveys the use of Artificial Intelligence in music in the pages ofOrganised Sound, from the first issue to the latest, at the time of writing. Traditionally, Artificial Intelligence systems for music have been designed with note-based composition in mind, but the research we present here finds that Artificial Intelligence has also had a significant impact in electroacoustic music, with contributions in the fields of sound analysis, real-time sonic interaction and interactive performance-driven composition, to cite but three. Two distinct categories emerged in theOrganised Soundpapers: on the one hand, philosophically and/or psychologically inspired, symbolic approaches and, on the other hand, biologically inspired approaches, also referred to as Artificial Life approaches. The two approaches are not mutually exclusive in their use, and in some cases are combined to achieve ‘best of both’ solutions. That said, asOrganised Soundis uniquely positioned in the electroacoustic music community, it is somewhat surprising that work addressing important compositional issues such as musical form and structure, which Artificial Intelligence can be readily applied to, is not more present in these pages.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document