Representational Content in terms of Dynamics for Meta-Cognition

1
Representational Content in terms of Dynamics for
Meta-Cognition

•  Jan Treur
•  
• Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
• Department of Artificial Intelligence
•  
• Utrecht University
• Department of Philosophy

2
Meta-Cognition

• one of the principles used to obtain cognitive
  architectures for self-consciousness
• e.g., Zalla in TSC00
• the phenomenal character of experience is
  conscious due to the fact that it is
  introspectively accessible

3
Meta-Level Architecture

• has been investigated in some depth within
  Artifical Intelligence
• problem what is the representational content of
  meta-level representations ?
• dynamics and interaction between the levels are
  essential ? problematic to define semantics
  only in terms of the state of the object level

4
Dynamics Perspective

• dynamics of a meta-level architecture
  transitions over time of combined (object level
  and meta-level) states
• semantics of a meta-level representationtemporal
  property of traces of the object level process

5
Interactivist Perspective on Mental States (1)
Dynamics of mental states and their interaction
with the environment are central When
interaction is completed, the system will end in
some one of its internal states - some of its
possible final states. Some environments will
leave the system in that same final state, when
interactions with this system are complete, and
some environments will leave the system in
different possible final states. (Bickhard,
1993)
6
Past Interaction Histories and Present Internal
States
presentinternal states
past interaction
7
Interactivist Perspective on Mental States (2)

• The overall system, with its possible final
  states, therefore, functions as a differentiator
  of environments, with the final states implictly
  defining the differentiation categories. (..)
• Representational content is constituted as
  indications of potential further interactions.
  (..)
• The claim is that such differentiated functional
  indications in the context of a goal-directed
  system constitute representation - emergent
  representation.
• (Bickhard, 1993)

8
Present Internal States and Future Interaction
Traces
presentinternal states
past interaction
future interaction
9
Object Level Representational Content as a
Dynamic Interaction Property

• present
• past future
• world interaction trace
• time

10
Interactivist Perspective on Mental States (3)

• In summary, representational content of mental
  states need to be
• grounded in interaction histories
• related to future interaction possibilities
• Formalisations are needed that cover this

11
Pain Example Mediating Role

• tissue damage causes pain
• heat causes pain
• pain causes ouch!
• pain causes future avoidance behaviour for
  possible sources e.g., wasps
• Note occurrence of this avoidance behaviour
  depends on events in the world

12
Pain Example Past Traces

• the set of histories of mental property pain
• PTRACES(InOnt, pain)
• an example member is the following interaction
  trace
•  

t0. input no tissue damage, no heat
t1. input tissue damage, no heat
t2. input tissue damage, no heat
13
Pain Example Future Traces

• the set of future traces for mental property
  pain
• FTRACES(InterfaceOnt, pain)
• an example member of this set

t0. input wasp present output ouch!
t1. input no wasp present
t2. input wasp present
t3. input wasp present output move
14
FormalisationTemporal Trace Language

• expressive language to specify dynamics
• traces M as first class citizens explicit
  reference to, comparison of and quantification
  over interaction histories and interaction
  futures
• state properties p as first class citizens
  explicit reference to and quantification over p
• explicit reference to, comparison of and
  quantification over time points t and durations d
• discrete, dense or real time frame possible

15
Pain Example Past Formula

• M a trace
• t a time point
• a past formula representing the set of histories
  of the mental property pain
• ?P(M , t)
• ?t1 t state(M , t1, input) injury ? ?t2
  t state(M , t2, input) heat

16
Pain Example Future Formula

• M a trace
• t a time point
• a future formula representing the set of future
  traces of the mental property pain
• ?F(M , t)
• ?t1 t state(M , t1, output) ouch!
  ?t2 t state(M , t2, input) wasp_present
  ? ?t3 t2 state(M , t3,
  output) move

17
Dynamics as Three-Level Traces

• a combined three-level state
• lt I, M, N gt
•   where
• N a meta-state M an object state I
  an interaction state
• a three-level trace
• a sequence of combined three-level states

18
Meta-Level Representational Content as a Dynamic
Object Process Property

• present
• past future
• object process trace
• time

19
meta-levelprocess trace
object level process trace worldi
nteraction trace time
Three Levels of Representational Content and
Dynamics
20
Possible Transitions within a Combined Trace

• meta-state ? meta-state
  (meta-processing)
• meta-state ? object state (control
  effectuation)
• object state ? meta-state
  (introspection)
• object state ? object state (object
  processing)--------------------------------------
  ------------------------------------------
• object state ? interaction state
  (effectuation of action)
• interaction state ? object state
  (conceptualisation of sensory state)
• interaction state ? interaction state
• (sensory or motor event)

21
An Architecture for Meta-Cognition

• semantic content of object-representations past
  and future interaction processes
• semantic content of meta-representations past
  and future mental processes
• introspective capabilities in self-monitoring
  e.g., monitoring of the sensory processes by
  which information is acquired, and, in
  particular, of the modality (cf. Zalla, TSC00)
• meta-representations have control impact on the
  agents own future mental processes, focusing
  of sensory activities, and action selection

22
Related Approaches

• Zalla in TSC00 (nr. 278) on source
  modelling difference no formalized
  architecture proposed
• Cunningham in TSC00 (nr. 272) on axiomatic
  theory difference no explicit reference to
  traces within language

23
Conclusion (1)

• interactivist perspective on grounding of mental
  states relation between mental state and
  - interaction with the environment in the
  past - potential further interactions in the
  future

24
Conclusion (2)

• application of interactivist perspective on
  grounding of meta-cognitive states as well
  relation between meta-cognitive state and
  - mental processes in the past -
  potential mental processes in the future

25
Conclusion (3)

• result three-level architecture for
  meta-cognition that supports introspective
  capabilities and self-awareness