Aggregate Boid behavior to aid in artificial autopoietic organization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyzing carbon-based life on earth can lead to biased inferences on the nature of life as might exist in elsewhere in the universe in alternative forms, therefore, scientists have looked into either abstracting life into constituent systems it is comprised of, or logics of life, or lists of essential criteria, or essential dynamic patterning that characterizes the living. A system-level characterization that is and referred to as a general pattern of minimal life is autopoiesis (Varela et al., 1974) including production, maintenance and replacement of required constituents for setting up and maintaining an internal environment with self/other separation that regulates and is constitutive of processes that produce the environment and components for processes that comprise this ongoing activity of self-production in 'recursively', i.e., in a manner that allows the organizational pattern to continually reconstitute the conditions, components and processes required for its own perpetuation. This seminal concept of an autopoiesis is instantiated in life as we know it, but might also be instantiated in different media and in unforeseen ways. Other researchers have argued life is more than autopoiesis and that it is a co-emergent property of autopoiesis and cognition. Life produces many emergent properties such as synchronization and patterns as seen in flocks and herds of different animal species. The mechanics of this synchrony displayed in flocks and herd animals has been extracted by Craig Reynolds into a generative model referred to as "Boids". With these concepts in mind, we address the following research question: How can the synchronous maneuvers and aggregate behavior of Boids contribute to constitutive subsystems in realizing an autopoietic system? Can such a system exhibit minimal cognition? This work attempts to answer these questions with a bottom-up approach to constructing an artificial life system. We exhibit a computational model of autopoiesis and a minimal level of cognition in the sense of M. Bitbol and P. Luigi Luisi, whereby an autopoietic entity engages in active assimilation of external components as part of its activity of self-production.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".