Stigmergic epistemology, stigmergic cognition--论文代写范文精选

51Due论文代写网精选paper代写范文：“Stigmergic epistemology, stigmergic cognition”  认知是有限的,知识和认知是人类社会性的双面。如果社会认识论已经形成,调解和传播知识比较复杂,它的第三方的角色基本上是固定的。间接沟通的现象是由环境影响。扩展这个概念可能设想社会模拟人工神经网络，提供一定的认知结构。这篇社会paper代写范文构建一种社会认识论框架,共识主动性的理论复杂系统，通过内部的相互作用,运行在一个优化层面。

Abstract 
  To know is to cognize, to cognize is to be a culturally bounded, rationality-bounded and environmentally located agent. Knowledge and cognition are thus dual aspects of human sociality. If social epistemology has the formation, acquisition, mediation, transmission and dissemination of knowledge in complex communities of knowers as its subject matter, then its third party character is essentially stigmergic. In its most generic formulation, stigmergy is the phenomenon of indirect communication mediated by modifications of the environment. Extending this notion one might conceive of social stigmergy as the extra-cranial analog of an artificial neural network providing epistemic structure. This paper recommends a stigmergic framework for social epistemology to account for the supposed tension between individual action, wants and beliefs and the social corpora. We also propose that the so-called ‘‘extended mind’’ thesis offers the requisite stigmergic cognitive analog to stigmergic knowledge. Stigmergy as a theory of interaction within complex systems theory is illustrated through an example that runs on a particle swarm optimization algorithm. 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 
Keywords: Stigmergy; Social epistemology; Extended mind; Social cognition; Particle swarm optimization

 Introduction 
  To know is to cognize, to cognize is to be a culturally bounded, rationality-bounded and environmentally located agent.1 Knowledge and cognition are thus dual aspects of human sociality. If social epistemology has the formation, acquisition, mediation, transmission and dissemination of knowledge in complex communities of knowers as its subject matter, then its third party character is essentially stigmergic. In its most generic formulation, stigmergy is the phenomenon of indirect communication mediated by modifications of the environment. Extending this notion one might conceive of stigmergy as the extra-cranial analog of artificial neural networks or the extended mind. 

  With its emphasis on coordination, it acts as the binding agent for the epistemic and the cognitive. Coordination is, as David Kirsh (2006, p. 250) puts it, ‘‘the glue of distributed cognition’’. This paper, therefore, recommends a stigmergic framework for social epistemology to account for the supposed tension between individual action, wants and beliefs and the social corpora: paradoxes associated with complexity and unintended consequences. A corollary to stigmergic epistemology is stigmergic cognition, again running on the idea that modifiable environmental considerations need to be factored into cognitive abilities. In this sense, we take the extended mind thesis to be essentially stigmergic in character.

  This paper proceeds as follows. In Section 2, we set out the formal specifications of stigmergy. In Section 3, we illustrate the essentially stigmergic characteristics of socialepistemology. In Section 4, we examine extended mind externalism as the preeminent species of stigmergic cognition. In Section 5 we illustrate how the particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm for the optimization of a function could be understood as a useful tool for different processes of social cognition, ranging from the learning of publicly available knowledge by an individual knower, to the evolution of scientific knowledge. In Section 6, we offer some concluding remarks.

  Characterizing stigmergy The term stigmergy was coined by zoologist Grasse´ (1959) whose research concerned cellular structure, protistology and animal sociology, the latter of particular fascination. Grasse´ sought to understand the mechanisms underlying the emergence, regulation, and control of collective activities in social insects. Specifically, Grasse´’s research sought to address the so-called ‘‘coordination paradox’’: that is, how does one reconcile behavior at the individual level (given that individuals are constrained by knowledge and material resources) with the global/societal level of the termite colony. At first sight, behavior at the individual level appeared to be chaotic, which of course is at odds with the visibly impressive structures that only a highly organized colony of termites could achieve. What Grasse´ discovered in the coordination and regulation of termite colonies, is the phenomenon of indirect communication mediated by modifications of the environment – stigmergy.

  Until Grasse´, the two competing theories on offer mirrored the individualism–holism debate in social philosophy, discussion of which is deferred to the next section. One theorized that novel properties appeared at the level of the society with its own nomological and causal system: the ‘‘whole’’ explains the behavior of the parts. The competing theory treats each individual insect as if it were operating completely alone. Any ascription of collective behavior or division of labor was deemed illusory. Biologist Etienne Rabaud laid the conceptual ground for Grasse´ by introducing two concepts: 1. Interaction. 2. Interattraction.

  The former is the claim that individual behavior is essential to collective action. Creatures in close proximity to one another must have a reciprocal modifying behavior. The latter denotes the idea that creatures of the same species have a mutual attraction (for a detailed history of stigmergy in an entomological context, see Theraulaz & Bonabeau, 1999). Expanding upon Rabaud, Grasse´ took the view that sociality cannot merely be the result of interaction or interattraction as the individualist would have it. Collective behavior must also play a reciprocal role in modifying behavior, an insight he gleaned from his study of termite building behavior. Grasse´ observed that the coordination and regulation of building activities did not depend on the individual ‘‘agents’’ themselves but is informed by the structure of the nest. Pheromone traces left by others and modifications made by others have a cybernetic feedback. In other words, the environment acts a kind of distributed memory system. Different theorists have proffered different varieties of stigmergy. 

  Wilson (1975/2000, pp. 186–188) identifies two main variants: • Sematectonic stigmergy. • Sign-, cue-, or marker-based stigmergy. Sematectonic stigmergy denotes communication via modification of a physical environment, an elementary example being the carving out of trails. One needs only to cast an eye around any public space, a park or a college quadrangle for instance, to see the grass being worn away, revealing a dirt pathway that is a well-traveled, unplanned and thus indicates an ‘‘unofficial’’ intimation of a shortcut to some salient destination. Marker-based stigmergy denotes communication via a signaling mechanism (Engelbrecht, 2005; Kennedy, Eberhart, & Shi, 2001, p. 104). 

  A standard example is the phenomenon of pheromones laid by social insects. Pheromone imbued trails increase the likelihood of other ants following the aforementioned trails. Unlike sematectonic stigmergy which is a response to an environmental modification, marker-based stigmergy does not make any direct contribution to a given task. This classification seems to be more or less coextensive with Holland and Melhuish’s (1999) passive and active variant in that the former is informed by previous environmental modification (e.g. a vehicle obliged to follow the extant ruts in a muddied road); the latter, a positive intentional response to a given state of affairs. As Parunak (2005, p. 11) puts it sematectonic stigmergy is ‘‘the current state to the solution’’: by that we take him to mean that what confronts the agent at a given point is the accumulation of prior agent activity. 

  Theraulaz and Bonabeau (1999, pp. 104–105) talk of two classes of stigmergic mechanisms: quantitative and qualitative. With quantitative stigmergy, the stimulusresponse comprises stimuli that do not differ qualitatively and only modify the probability of a response. So the stronger the pheromone trail, the larger the probability of a response. Qualitative stigmergy denotes the idea that individuals interact through, and respond to, qualitative stimuli, which in turn affects the behavior of those who follow – an ongoing iteration. To bring out this contrast better quantitative stigmergy would be the construction of pillars in termites’ nests, the initial conditions being soil being infused with pheromone. In a qualitative stigmergic process, for example the construction of wasps’ nests, a new cell is constructed to correspond with an existing cell (Camazine et al., 2003, p. 418).

  Though the concept of stigmergy has been associated with ant- or swarm-like ‘‘agents’’ with minimal cognitive ability or with creatures of a higher cognitive capacity such as fish (schooling patterns) or birds (flocking patterns) or sheep (herding behavior), stigmergy offers a powerful metaphor to be deployed in the human domain. Some might object to the extension of Grasse´’s insight to the human– human world (Shell & Mataric, 2003; Tummolini & Castelfrananchi, 2007). We reject this contention on the grounds that Grasse´’s concept of stigmergy is a classic case of an essentially contested notion. By this we simply mean that different theorists stress different stands or elements in different contexts inspired by a paradigmatic application – in this case Grasse´’s concept filling this role. (paper代写)

  Even if one considers human activity as quasi-stigmergic, the kernel of the idea remains intact: that is, in Clark’s words ‘‘the use of environmental conditions as instigators of action and the overall ability of the group to perform problem-solving activity that exceeds the knowledge and the computational scope of each individual member’’ (Clark, 1997, p. 234, note 9; see also Gureckis & Goldstone, 2006) or in Holland & Melhuish’s words ‘‘All that is necessary for stigmergy to occur is for the outcome of the behavior of the relevant agent to be appropriately affected by previous environmental changes’’ (Holland & Melhuish, 1999, p. 174). Though this characterization is not dissimilar to distributed cognition broadly conceived, stigmergy distinctively relies on the cybernetic relationship of agent ! environment ! agent ! environment through ongoing and mutual modification or conditioning: and it is this aspect that ensures that the concept of stigmergy has extensional adequacy (the set of features that identify the sort of things the concept applies to).(paper代写)

  51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有；未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象，51Due保留一切法律追诉权。
  更多paper代写范文欢迎访问我们主页 www.51due.com 当然有paper代写需求可以和我们24小时在线客服QQ:800020041 联系交流。-X(paper代写)