Group items tagged

possibly some of you might find this interesting. methodology for selecting research agendas particularly with respect to NASA from the RAND corporation "Develops a unified decisionmaking approach for selecting aeronautics research agendas that quantifies the social and economic reasons for the research, balances competing perspectives, and enables transparent explanation of the resulting decisions."

What is the best (wisest) size for a group of individuals? Couzin and Kao put together a series of mathematical models that included correlation and several cues. In one model, for example, a group of animals had to choose between two options-think of two places to find food. But the cues for each choice were not equally reliable, nor were they equally correlated. The scientists found that in these models, a group was more likely to choose the superior option than an individual. Common experience will make us expect that the bigger the group got, the wiser it would become. But they found something very different. Small groups did better than individuals. But bigger groups did not do better than small groups. In fact, they did worse. A group of 5 to 20 individuals made better decisions than an infinitely large crowd. The problem with big groups is this: a faction of the group will follow correlated cues-in other words, the cues that look the same to many individuals. If a correlated cue is misleading, it may cause the whole faction to cast the wrong vote. Couzin and Kao found that this faction can drown out the diversity of information coming from the uncorrelated cue. And this problem only gets worse as the group gets bigger.

Couzin research was the starting point that co-inspired PaGMO from the very beginning. We invited him (and he came) at a formation flying conference for a plenary here in ESTEC. You can see PaGMO as a collective problem solving simulation. In that respect, we learned already that the size of the group and its internal structure (topology) counts and cannot be too large or too random. One of the project the ACT is running (and currently seeking for new ideas/actors) is briefly described here (http://esa.github.io/pygmo/examples/example2.html) and attempts answering the question :"How is collective decision making influenced by the information flow through the group?" by looking at complex simulations of large 'archipelagos'.

nice list again!

demonstrating that people make better decisions about some kinds of things - but worse decisions about other kinds of things‚ when they have a strong urge to urinate.

Only took 2.5 weeks  till they make stupid decisions...

Taking decisions - how monkeys do it http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v447/n7148/pdf/nature05852.pdf

Behavioral variations in fruit fly are not due to randomness but rather to decisions taken by the animal. Seems like free will.... also: http://brembs.net/spontaneous/

If we have so much interest in decision processes, why don't we make a study on it?

Big news for developers out there: Google has just announced the release of a new, open sourced programming language called Go. The company ...

Having Google backing it will certainly help, even though they are presenting it as a "system level" (i.e., hard-core) language, and in that domain it is much more difficult to bullshit your way to a position of relevance. Look at Java: Sun pushed it like hell and it is certainly widely used in many contexts (corporate, web and embedded markets mostly), yet it completely failed to win the hearts of "open-source" developers (or, more generally, of those developers who are not forced to use it by virtue of some management-driven decision).

"or, more generally, of those developers who are not forced to use it by virtue of some management-driven decision" completely agree with that!!

Super lol for all those who abused of the law in their slides / opinions / decisions ..

I used the law in some slides :-)! This sentence is more or less the summary "The end of Moore's law is not a technical issue, it is an economic issue,". As Moore's himself recognized last year, the Moore's law itself is a pretty wild extrapolation of one exponential growth when there were only 5 experimental points. It is remarkable however how the semiconductor industry grabbed this and made every single effort to make it true. This effort was rewarded by turning semiconductor industry into one of the most important industries worldwide. Now these are challenging times indeed, and "when tide is gone, we realize who was swimming naked"...

The "law" is one of the most successful concrete predictions of the technological future... Still very impressive and a lot more long-lived than Moore had probably ever dreamed of :)

:) always thought so!

The direct link without the Washington post paywall https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329131866_Going_With_Your_Gut_The_Inaccuracy_of_Forecast_Revisions_in_a_Football_Score_Prediction_Game

Actually read the paper now and think that this is very doubtful that this could be generalised. They used predictions for football games by those betting on outcomes ...

I knew it!! I always said the same, or actually did I .. wait ... I actually do not remember :)

Asimov's Foundation meets ACT's Tipping Point Prediction?

still, some interesting thoughts in there ... "Then you have the 50-year cycles of violence. Turchin describes these as the building up and then the release of pressure. Each time, social inequality creeps up over the decades, then reaches a breaking point. Reforms are made, but over time, those reforms are reversed, leading back to a state of increasing social inequality. The graph above shows how regular these spikes are - though there's one missing in the early 19th century, which Turchin attributes to the relative prosperity that characterized the time. He also notes that the severity of the spikes can vary depending on how governments respond to the problem. Turchin says that the United States was in a pre-revolutionary state in the 1910s, but there was a steep drop-off in violence after the 1920s because of the progressive era. The governing class made decisions to reign in corporations and allowed workers to air grievances. These policies reduced the pressure, he says, and prevented revolution. The United Kingdom was also able to avoid revolution through reforms in the 19th century, according to Turchin. But the most common way for these things to resolve themselves is through violence. Turchin takes pains to emphasize that the cycles are not the result of iron-clad rules of history, but of feedback loops - just like in ecology. "In a predator-prey cycle, such as mice and weasels or hares and lynx, the reason why populations go through periodic booms and busts has nothing to do with any external clocks," he writes. "As mice become abundant, weasels breed like crazy and multiply. Then they eat down most of the mice and starve to death themselves, at which point the few surviving mice begin breeding like crazy and the cycle repeats." There are competing theories as well. A group of researchers at the New England Complex Systems Institute - who practice a discipline called econophysics - have built their own model of political violence and

It's not the scientific activity described in the article that is uninteresting, on the contrary! But the way it is described is just a bad joke. Once again the results itself are seemingly not sexy enough and thus something is sold as the big revolution, though it's just the application of the oldest scientific principles in a slightly different way than used before.

"A platform for public participation in and discussion of the human perspective on machine-made moral decisions" Machine Ethics is basically the return of philosophy through code. Here you can learn a bit about it, and help the MIT collect data on how humans make choices when faced with ethical dilemmas, and how we perceive AIs making such choices.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1206.6389v2 for Guido; an interesting example of "takeover" research

trajectory calculations by no-brainers ... Newton known to primitive fishes? (can we use it for space? :-)

This is becoming a mess :)

I see your point, and I agree that funding was also promoted through the energy players and their political influence. A coincident parallel interest which is irrelevant to the fact that the question remains vital. How do we affect climate and how does it respond. Huge complex system to analyse which responds in various time scales which could obscure the trend. What if we made a conceptual parallelism with the L Ácquila case : Is the scientific method guilty or the interpretation of uncertainty in terms of societal mobilization? Should we leave the humanitarian aspect outside any scientific activity?

I do not think there is anyone arguing that the question is not interesting and complex. The debate, instead, addresses the predictive value of the models produced so far. Are they good enough to be used outside of the scientific process aimed at improving them? Or should one wait for "the scientific method" to bring forth substantial improvements to the current understanding and only then start using its results? One can take both stand points, but some recent developments will bring many towards the second approach.

If you've ever found your iPhone taking control of your life, there may be a good reason. It may think it has free will. That may not be quite as far-fetched as it sounds. Today, one leading scientist outlines a 'Turing Test' for free will and says that while simple devices such as thermostats cannot pass, more complex ones like iPhones might.

I don't know the inventor of that nonsense that the free will should be the result of QM. It's about the only point I agree with the author of the paper: QM is not necessary and doesn't help. What I meant: all these thought experiments done by typical ultra-naive realists (or ultra-naive physicalists, if you prefer) that cultivate the university departments of physics, computer science etc. are put the cart before the horse. First one has to clarify the role of physical theories and its concepts (e.g. causality) and then one can start to ask how "free will" could perhaps be seen in these theories. More than 200 years ago there existed a famous philosopher named Kant who had some interesting thoughts about this. But authors like Lloyd behave as if he never existed, in fact is view of the world is even pre-Platonic!

Henry Kissinger How I'm missing yer And wishing you were here