Weekly QuEST Discussion Topics, 19 Dec

December 18, 2014 Leave a comment

QuEST Discussion Topics for 19 Dec 2014

Below you will see a link to ISAP 2015 held at WSU, just an FYI to our local QuEST members who might be interested in attending.

http://isap.wright.edu/conferences/2015/session-view/2015-05-05

As a reminder the first QuEST meeting of any calendar year we dedicate to the Kabrisky Memorial Lecture.  The 2015 Kabrisky Memorial lecture will be on 9 Jan 2015.  It will be the current over view of “What is QuEST.”  In preparation of the Kabrisky Memorial Lecture we are using our last meeting of this calendar year to review some of the material we’ve hit throughout the year for consideration for inclusion in our overview Kabrisky lecture.  Keep in mind the goal of the Kabrisky lecture is to have a single overview talk that doesn’t explain all the details of our material but provides the insights for someone from the outside so they can get an understanding of our effort without any background in our jargon.  So I invite everyone to pick through your notes / the blog and bring up things you want us to consider as important points that should be included in the “What is QuEST – Kabrisky Memorial Lecture”.  Specifically we want to ensure the overview talk captures most of the ideas of QuEST maybe without all the details.  So this week we will review topics emphasizing topics from Sept-Dec 2014, but any topics are open as this is our last meeting of 2014.  Another use of the discussion is to generate a list of topics we want to have meetings dedicated to in the new year so if you have topics or they occur during the meetings jot them down and let us know.

Some example topics I’ve been reviewing for consideration:

Last week we spent  some time discussing big data – and QuEST perspectives of big data – so we would like to review some of our walk-aways from those discussions and try to mature the thoughts we left hanging – specifically meaning and meaning making and relations to meta data – also the recent competitions and what is the current limits in performance

The meaning discussions also brought back up the role of ‘context’ – so we want to revisit our ideas we discussed on context – and that has the relation to sensemaking –

There was considerable discussion on dreaming / sedation / hypnosis … -

Narratives – Definition of noun narrative:  story or account of events, experiences, or the like, whether true or fictitious.  Narratives are ubiquitous in human experience. We use them to communicate, convince, explain, and entertain. As far as we know, every society in the world has narratives, which suggests they are rooted in our psychology and serve an important cognitive function. It is becoming increasingly clear that, to truly understand and explain human intelligence, beliefs, and behaviors, we will have to understand why and to what extent narrative is universal and explain (or explain away) the function it serves. The aim of this workshop series is to address key questions that advance our understanding of narrative and our ability to model it computationally.

Viv – brought up the idea of a program that could put the things it knows together in new ways.   ** again the key idea is conceptual combination – and of course the middle ware to be able to find/access in a meaningful manner other services / facts *** As talks continued, they lit on the concept of a cloud-based intelligence, a global brain. “The only way to make this ubiquitous conversational assistant is to open it up to third parties to allow everyone to plug into it,” Brigham says. *** I would contend for such a cloud based intelligence to be achieved it has to have a type 1 and type 2 representation – and as you work through the examples you can see some places where this idea fits *** don’t confuse this statement to mean you can’t achieve some value but at the end of the day what you achieve will be in convincing the human to adapt to the technology versus melding into a joint cognitive system that is more collaborative like a human assistant – ** …

The next topic has to do with the current debate on ISIS / ISIL –specifically the connection to things like Ferguson Mo and also Rik W brought up the mechanisms used in Bee Hives to keep them healthy (how they eliminate the old / sick / weak.  So I again want to discuss is there a common theme that is consistent with our think piece –  Fighting an Adaptable foe.  Specifically the common issues in fighting in cyber, fighting the war on cancer and the fight against terrorism – now adding the mechanisms nature uses to maintain healthy societies like beehives and also social unrest like Ferguson Mo.  Recall our interest in this topic started by an article in the area of the fight against cancer the basic idea — still in the experimental stages — is that cancer cells cannot turn into a lethal tumor without the cooperation of other cells nearby. That may be why autopsies repeatedly find that most people who die of causes other than cancer have at least some tiny tumors in their bodies that had gone unnoticed.  *** in fact confirms matt’s brothers observation – and the lung cancer observation – that found as many lung cancers in nonsmokers although clearly more smokers die from lung cancer *** According to current thinking, the tumors were kept in check, causing no harm. … It also may mean that cancers grow in part because normal cells surrounding them allowed them to escape. It also means that there might be a new way to think about treatment: cancer might be kept under control by preventing healthy cells around it from crumbling*** this is the provide security and safety strategy approach to asymmetric war ***…“Think of it as this kid in a bad neighborhood,” said Dr. Susan Love, a breast cancer surgeon and president of the Dr. Susan Love Research Foundation. “You can take the kid out of the neighborhood and put him in a different environment and he will behave totally differently.” We also had to point of using insecticides attack pests in agriculture.

The next topic we want to hit is the generation of symbolic representations – for QuEST we are talking the vocabulary of working memory, Qualia.  We want to review an article provided to our colleague Sandy V by Prof Ron Sun.  Autonomous generation of symbolic representations through subsymbolic activities  Ron Sun Version of record first published: 04 Sep 2012. …This paper explores an approach for autonomous generation of symbolic representations from an agent’s subsymbolic activities within the agent-environment interaction. The paper describes a psychologically plausible general framework and its various methods for autonomously creating symbolic representations. The symbol generation is accomplished within, and is intrinsic to, a generic and comprehensive cognitive architecture for capturing a wide variety of psychological processes (namely, CLARION). This work points to ways of obtaining more psychologically/cognitively realistic symbolic and subsymbolic representations within the framework of a cognitive architecture, and accentuates the relevance of such an approach to cognitive science and psychology.

I realize there are far too many topics above – but keep in mind the goal of this discussion is to pick out the important points that need to be captured in our overview ‘what is Quest’ presentation – that any of us can give

Categories: Uncategorized

Weekly QuEST Discussion Topics and News, 12 Dec

December 11, 2014 Leave a comment

QuEST for 12 Dec 2014

As a reminder the first QuEST meeting of any calendar year we dedicate to the Kabrisky Memorial Lecture.  One of the original founding members of our group suggested early on the first meeting of each calendar year we give a fresh over view of “What is QuEST.”  In preparation of the Kabrisky Memorial Lecture I am spending our remaining meetings of this calendar year to review some of the material we’ve hit throughout the year for consideration for inclusion in our overview Kabrisky lecture.  Keep in mind the goal of the Kabrisky lecture is to have a single overview talk that doesn’t explain all the details of our material but provides the insights for someone from the outside so they can get an understanding of our effort without any background in our jargon.  So I invite everyone to pick through your notes / the blog and bring up things you want us to consider as important points that should be included in the “What is QuEST – Kabrisky Memorial Lecture”.  Specifically we want to ensure the overview talk captures most of the ideas of QuEST maybe without all the details.  So this week we will review topics from Jul-Sept 2014.  Another use of the discussion is to generate a list of topics we want to have meetings dedicated to in the new year so if you have topics or they occur during the meetings jot them down and let us know.

Some example topics I’ve been reviewing for consideration this week:

This week there has been some virtual interactions on the topic of how do we represent Qualia and instantiate computing with Qualia – focused mostly on the application of our colleague Mike R.  We want to spend at least some time discussing the details as they force us to put some meat on the discussion of what is missing in current cognitive solutions and how we might take our ideas to engineering solutions.

Last week we spent  some time discussing big data – and QuEST perspectives of big data – so we would like to review some of our walk-aways from those discussions and try to mature the thoughts we left hanging – specifically meaning and meaning making and relations to meta data – also the recent competitions and what is the current limits in performance

The meaning discussions also brought back up the role of ‘context’ – so we want to revisit our ideas we discussed on context – and that has the relation to sensemaking –

There was considerable discussion on dreaming / sedation / hypnosis … -

Narratives – Definition of noun narrative:  story or account of events, experiences, or the like, whether true or fictitious.  Narratives are ubiquitous in human experience. We use them to communicate, convince, explain, and entertain. As far as we know, every society in the world has narratives, which suggests they are rooted in our psychology and serve an important cognitive function. It is becoming increasingly clear that, to truly understand and explain human intelligence, beliefs, and behaviors, we will have to understand why and to what extent narrative is universal and explain (or explain away) the function it serves. The aim of this workshop series is to address key questions that advance our understanding of narrative and our ability to model it computationally.

Vivbrought up the idea of a program that could put the things it knows together in new ways.   ** again the key idea is conceptual combination – and of course the middle ware to be able to find/access in a meaningful manner other services / facts *** As talks continued, they lit on the concept of a cloud-based intelligence, a global brain. “The only way to make this ubiquitous conversational assistant is to open it up to third parties to allow everyone to plug into it,” Brigham says. *** I would contend for such a cloud based intelligence to be achieved it has to have a type 1 and type 2 representation – and as you work through the examples you can see some places where this idea fits *** don’t confuse this statement to mean you can’t achieve some value but at the end of the day what you achieve will be in convincing the human to adapt to the technology versus melding into a joint cognitive system that is more collaborative like a human assistant – ** …

I realize there are far too many topics above – but keep in mind the goal of this discussion is to pick out the important points that need to be captured in our overview ‘what is Quest’ presentation – that any of us can give

news summary

Categories: Uncategorized

Weekly QuEST Discussion Topics and News, 5 Dec

December 4, 2014 Leave a comment

QuEST Discussion Topics for 5 Dec 2014

As a reminder the first QuEST meeting of any calendar year we dedicate to the Kabrisky Memorial Lecture.  One of the original founding members of our group suggested early on the first meeting of each calendar year we give a fresh over view of “What is QuEST.”  In preparation of the Kabrisky Memorial Lecture I am spending our remaining meetings of this calendar year to review some of the material we’ve hit throughout the year for consideration for inclusion in our overview Kabrisky lecture.  Keep in mind the goal of the Kabrisky lecture is to have a single overview talk that doesn’t explain all the details of our material but provides the insights for someone from the outside so they can get an understanding of our effort without any background in our jargon.  So I invite everyone to pick through your notes / the blog and bring up things you want us to consider as important points that should be included in the “What is QuEST – Kabrisky Memorial Lecture”.  Specifically we want to ensure the overview talk captures most of the ideas of QuEST maybe without all the details.  So this week we will review topics from Apr-Jun 2014.  Another use of the discussion is to generate a list of topics we want to have meetings dedicated to in the new year so if you have topics or they occur during the meetings jot them down and let us know.

Some example topics I’ve been reviewing for consideration:

Blending – the term we use to capture the idea that we believe that decisions are made as some form of blending between multiple processes (Type 1 and Type 2) and even those are not distinct – but the cognitive conclusions are probably some blended form of insights from the multiple competing processes.  As an example Hammond presented a set of axes that might help engineer when one set of processes should dominate versus the other.

There was a set of work by Luis von Ahn of CMU – since we had previously covered CAPTCHAs – his work including the ESP game etc provided us insights into human cognition –

We spend some effort discussing big data – and QuEST perspectives of big data – so we would like to review some of our walk-aways from those discussions – specifically meaning and meaning making and relations to meta data –

Meaning – although part of the big data discussion – I wanted to list meaning as a real topic of interest – a Theory of meaning – was central to many discussions this year – there was some work by De La Cruz on ‘Making fingers and words count in a cognitive robot’ – provided insights into how humans develop meaning – so I want to review that – there was the work by Louise Connell on embodied conceptual combination – a potential approach to abstraction – and then there was the work by Grill-Spector on visual recognition = what is the series of steps involved in object recognition –

The meaning discussions also brought back up the role of ‘context’ – so we want to revisit our ideas we discussed on context – and that has the relation to sensemaking –

There was considerable discussion on dreaming / sedation / hypnosis … -

I realize there are far too many topics above – but keep in mind the goal of this discussion is to pick out the important points that need to be captured in our overview ‘what is Quest’ presentation – that any of us can give

news summary 1 news summary 2

Categories: Uncategorized

Weekly QuEST Discussion Topics, 21 Nov

November 20, 2014 Leave a comment

The first QuEST meeting of any calendar year we dedicate to the Kabrisky Memorial Lecture.  One of the original founding members of our group suggested early on the first meeting of each calendar year we give a fresh over view of “What is QuEST.”  This year I want to spend our remaining meetings at then end of this calendar year to review some of the material we’ve hit throughout the year for consideration for inclusion in our overview Kabrisky lecture.  Keep in mind the goal of the Kabrisky lecture is to have a single overview talk that doesn’t explain all the details of our material but provides the insights for someone from the outside can get an understanding of our effort without any background in our jargon.  So I invite everyone to pick through your notes / the blog and bring up things you want us to consider as important points that should be included in the “What is QuEST – Kabrisky Memorial Lecture”.  Specifically we want to ensure the overview talk captures most of the ideas of QuEST maybe without all the details.  By my count there appears to be 4 QuEST meetings left before the Kabrisky lecture on the 9th of Jan.  So this week we will review topics from Jan-Mar 2014.

As an example of the types of discussions I want to have in these meetings till the end of the year:

Started the year considering LaRue and specifically how to do tenet consistent Type 2 processes using that architecture. – we ended the year considering how to do the same thing using a combination of ACT-r and Semantic networks infrastructure / ontology software and conventional machine learning approaches for the Mike R. effort.  So we want to start this week with a discussion on what are our current positions on implementing dual process solutions using existing software / frameworks… – so the question is how should we position our interest in existing cognitive models in the overview talk?

Categories: Uncategorized

Weekly QuEST Discussion Topics and News, 14 Nov

November 13, 2014 Leave a comment

This week, our QuEST colleague Steven Harbour will present his research and lead a discussion on:

A Neuroergonomic Quasi-Experiment: Predictors of Situation Awareness
and Display Usability with USAF Pilots while Performing Complex Tasks

•       Despite scientific exigency

-          No precise and predictive nexuses for current theories of situation awareness and specific quantifiable cognitive and perceptual processes  

•       Theoretical Model of Situation Awareness (TMSA) recognizes perception as a critical first step, however, there are no specific or quantitative links between perceptual abilities and situation awareness

-          These are conceptual models that provide little specificity with regards to the neurocognitive processes

•       Needed theoretical advancement is hampered by lack of specific, testable predictions regarding plausible component processes

-          The results of this study will fill in a key gap in the TMSA, and in so doing produce an Enhanced – TMSAenabling both theoretical refinement and improved practical applications

•       Seminal research, has found that visual processing was involved in situation awareness. However, the specific neurocognitive component processes had not been explored in detail. This work must therefore test explicit hypotheses regarding specific abilities that may contribute to situation awareness.

•       Visual processing: can be categorized as static and dynamic, and may be operationalized as visual attentiveness and perceptiveness, integrated with visuospatial memory.  

•       Consequently, the primary purpose of this quasi-experimental quantitative study was to test the predictive value of these specific candidate visuo-cognitive abilities as predictors of situation awareness.

•       Therefore, this project tested the predictive value of these variables as factors between a particular task to be performed and the eventual outcome of situation awareness.

news summary (3)

Categories: Uncategorized

Weekly QuEST Discussion Topics and News, 7 Nov

November 6, 2014 Leave a comment

QuEST 7 Nov, 2014

The first topic this week is to revisit some of the material from the keynote given by Capt Amerika at the National Symposia for Sensor and Data Fusion.  Specifically last week Mike Y / Jared had questioned the use of some of the terms.  Capt A sent out a modified set of definitions and there was some email exchanges this week on the content.  So we want to take a couple of minutes updating the group and having any discussion on how we will use the terms agent, data, information, meaning, query, unexpected query, situation/simulation/structural coherence as defining characteristics of consciousness, consciousness and finally QuEST agents.

The second topic is once we’ve converged on those defining characteristics of consciousness we need to revisit specific driver problems to talk about engineering solutions.  Capt A met with Mike R this week and we spent the time to get into the details of his cyber effort.  We use those details to attempt to put some specificity on engineering artificially conscious solutions.  We hope to discuss ideas on ‘How to we generate a situated / simulated / structurally coherent representation for his cyber malicious activity detection driver problem’.

That discussion led us back to revisit the information in the ‘unreasonable effectiveness of data’ article.  There are some ideas in that article that provide us some insights into how to define the axes of the simulation in our artificial conscious agents using modern approaches to Big Data instead of waiting for large ‘truthed’ data sets.

news summary (8)

Categories: Uncategorized

Weekly QuEST Discussion Topics and News, 31 Oct

October 30, 2014 Leave a comment

This week’s discussion will center upon Capt Amerika’s keynote NSSDF talk.  Please see below for title and abstract

Situational Consciousness versus Situational

Awareness – A Requirement for Autonomy?

ABSTRACT

What is autonomy?  How is it different than automation? What is unique to critters, that facilitates their autonomy that we’ve not yet been able to engineer in machine based systems?  Is it that our machine based solutions do not have all the information that they need to be autonomous?  Is it that our machine solutions don’t understand the meaning of the data/information they are being provided? Is it that our machine solutions can’t project what the data/information is suggesting is going to be occurring in the environment next, projection into the future?  These are the levels of situational awareness.  So is it that our machines don’t have enough situational awareness?  This paper proposes that maximizing situational awareness will NOT lead to autonomous solutions.  Situational awareness requires a valid model be available to account for any stimuli and all  relevant stimuli required for the appropriate model be available.  This paper suggest it is consciousness or at least some engineering approximation to consciousness, situational consciousness, is required for autonomy.

news summary 

Categories: Uncategorized
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.