|
[DPRG] Re: Allen Robots (Will's emotions)
Subject: [DPRG] Re: Allen Robots (Will's emotions)
From: David M Wilson
davidmw at tx.rr.com
Date: Mon Mar 12 13:23:03 CDT 2007
>Creating states for states sake may not be an end goal, but it
>does seem to model the way animals and physics at very deep
>levels work.
If classically defined atoms are the deep levels mentioned here then it
follows that states are fairly immutable life conditions that biological
processes and behaviors move between.
In the early 1900's our working knowledge of electron orbits described
specific orbital distances, pathing, and energy levels. Easy to draw and
easy to teach, the model has uses and can still be found in educational
materials.
It is more likely that biological processes are better modeled as existing
within a probability cloud. Perhaps any given metric in this cloud has two
or more end points and those points are very tiny and in some sort of
wavelike motion. If we consider a metric like 'alertness' then one point is
perhaps coma/stupor and the other is 'fully alert.' At any point in time the
organism's alertness factor can be represented by a spot in the cloud
between the drifting end points. In this model our distance to the end
points is what matters, not jumping between hard coded states.
We naturally slip, within a few seconds, in and out of presumed states like
'situational awareness,' 'high alert,' 'happy,' and 'meditation.' Witness
that feelings of 'hunger' and 'full bladder' will come and go many times
before being satisfied.
Even if you can pause on the 'fully alert' end point at 1 pm each day, the
end point moves. Today you could be alert due to immediate danger to self.
Tomorrow it might be an alertness due to conflict, sex, hunger, whatever.
Different biological processes and behaviors that we attempt to understand
probably have different orientations in the probability cloud and they exert
differing levels of influence on neighboring behaviors. Emotions may
function like high-gravity point sources that significantly influence many
things in the cloud. Likewise -- hormones, mental illness, brain damage and
other human conditions can be neatly represented as influencing all or many
behaviors in our probability cloud.
A twitching camera wasn't offered as an example of intelligent behavior. It
apparently sounds like a bug or mental illness from my description. But
perhaps we should discuss canine tail wagging. The horse uses the tail to
remove insects from the skin while the canine tail seems to function as an
emotional / social communicative tool.
The canine tail seems frivolous and even a waste of energy yet may influence
our fondness, trust, and the historical Western desire to further the
development of the species as companions rather than as food.
I don't view this camera behavior as intelligent. Maybe it is better called
fortuitous than emergent. It is likely that the display will generate more
smiles from observers and is likely that it encourages development rather
than abandonment of the design. If the behavior was unproductive then we'd
have a different story - a bug perhaps.
The ability to communicate enthusiasm and willingness to be a 'play partner'
are clearly useful when interacting with humans, even if it isn't engineered
or intelligent.
David Wilson
More information about the DPRG mailing list
|
