Sociocybernetics Sociocybernetics is an interdisciplinary science between sociology and general systems theory and cybernetics. The International Sociological Association has a specialist research committee in the area – RC51 – which publishes the (electronic) Journal of Sociocybernetics. The term "socio" in the name of sociocybernetics refers to any social system (as defined, among others, by Talcott Parsons and Niklas Luhmann). Sociocybernetics aims to generate a general theoretical framework for understanding cooperative behavior in the context of a theory of evolution. Sociocybernetics claims to include both what are called first order cybernetics and second order cybernetics. See also[edit] References[edit] Further reading[edit] External links[edit]
Setpoint (control system) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Target value for the process variable of a control system In the context of PID controller, the setpoint represents the reference or goal for the controlled process variable. It serves as the benchmark against which the actual process variable (PV) is continuously compared. The PID controller calculates an error signal by taking the difference between the setpoint and the current value of the process variable. where is the error at a given time is the setpoint, is the process variable at time Cruise control The error can be used to return a system to its norm. error is used to control the PV so that it equals the SP. error is classically used in the PID controller. Industrial applications Special consideration must be given for engineering applications.
SpiNNaker From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The completed design is housed in 10 19-inch racks, with each rack holding over 100,000 cores.[13] The cards holding the chips are held in 5 blade enclosures, and each core emulates 1,000 neurons.[13] In total, the goal is to simulate the behaviour of aggregates of up to a billion neurons in real time.[14] This machine requires about 100 kW from a 240 V supply and an air-conditioned environment.[15] SpiNNaker is being used as one component of the neuromorphic computing platform for the Human Brain Project.[16][17]
Semiotics Study of signs and sign processes Semiosis is any activity, conduct, or process that involves signs. Signs can be communicated through thought itself or through the senses. Contemporary semiotics is a branch of science that studies meaning-making and various types of knowledge.[1] The semiotic tradition explores the study of signs and symbols as a significant part of communications. Semiotics is frequently seen as having important anthropological and sociological dimensions. Fundamental semiotic theories take signs or sign systems as their object of study. History and terminology [edit] The importance of signs and signification has been recognized throughout much of the history of philosophy and psychology. It would not be until Augustine of Hippo[6] that the nature of the sign would be considered within a conventional system. John Locke (1690), himself a man of medicine, was familiar with this 'semeiotics' as naming a specialized branch within medical science. Ferdinand de Saussure
Subsidiarity Principle of social organization Subsidiarity is a principle of social organization that holds that social and political issues should be dealt with at the most immediate or local level that is consistent with their resolution. The Oxford English Dictionary defines subsidiarity as "the principle that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed at a more local level".[1] The concept is applicable in the fields of government, political science, neuropsychology, cybernetics, management and in military command (mission command). The OED adds that the term "subsidiarity" in English follows the early German usage of "Subsidiarität".[2] More distantly, it is derived from the Latin verb subsidio (to aid or help), and the related noun subsidium (aid or assistance). Political theory[edit] The term "subsidiarity" is also used to refer to a tenet of some forms of conservative or libertarian thought in the United States. See also[edit]
Superorganism A termite mound made by the cathedral termite A coral colony A superorganism is an organism consisting of many organisms. The term is now usually meant to be a social unit of eusocial animals, where division of labour is highly specialised and where individuals are not able to survive by themselves for extended periods of time. The Gaia hypothesis of James Lovelock[2] and the work of James Hutton, Vladimir Vernadsky and Guy Murchie, have suggested that the biosphere can be considered a superorganism. Superorganisms are important in cybernetics, particularly biocybernetics. Superorganic in social theory[edit] Similarly, economist Carl Menger expanded upon the evolutionary nature of much social growth, but without ever abandoning methodological individualism. Spencer and Menger both argued that because it is individuals who choose and act, any social whole should be considered less than an organism, though Menger emphasized this more emphatically. Problems and criticisms[edit] See also[edit]
Second-order cybernetics Second-order cybernetics, also known as the cybernetics of cybernetics, investigates the construction of models of cybernetic systems. It investigates cybernetics with awareness that the investigators are part of the system, and of the importance of self-referentiality, self-organizing, the subject–object problem, etc. Investigators of a system can never see how it works by standing outside it because the investigators are always engaged cybernetically with the system being observed; that is, when investigators observe a system, they affect and are affected by it. Overview[edit] The anthropologists Gregory Bateson and Margaret Mead contrasted first and second-order cybernetics with this diagram in an interview in 1973.[1] It emphasizes the requirement for a possibly constructivist participant observer in the second order case: . . . essentially your ecosystem, your organism-plus-environment, is to be considered as a single circuit.[1] See also[edit] Gyroteleostasis References[edit]
Robopsychology From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Study of personalities and behavior of intelligent machines Robopsychology is the study of the personalities and behavior of intelligent machines. The term was coined by Isaac Asimov in the short stories collected in I, Robot, which featured robopsychologist Dr. Susan Calvin, and whose plots largely revolved around the protagonist solving problems connected with intelligent robot behaviour.[1][2][3] The term has been also used in some academic studies from the field of psychology and human–computer interactions,[4] and it refers to the study of the psychological consequences of living in societies where the application of robotics is becoming increasingly common.[5] In real life[edit] There is a robopsychology research division at Ars Electronica Futurelab.[7] A.V. In fiction[edit] As described by Asimov, robopsychology appears to be a mixture of detailed mathematical analysis and traditional psychology, applied to robots. See also[edit] References[edit]
Symposium on Principles of Self-Organization The Symposium on Principles of Self-Organization was held at Allerton House on 8–9 June 1960. It was a key conference in the development of cybernetics and was in many ways a continuation of the Macy Conferences. it was organised by Heinz von Foerster through the Biological Computer Laboratory based at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.[1] It was sponsored by the Information Systems Branch of the U.S. Office of Naval Research.[2] Participants[edit] There were 38 male participants:[1] Department of Electrical Engineering at the University of Illinois[edit] This was the host organisation. Other participants from Illinois[edit] John Bowman, Technological Institute, Northwestern UniversityScott Cameron, Armour Research FoundationPeter Greene, Committee on Mathematical Biology, University of ChicagoFriedrich Hayek, Committee on Social Thought, University of ChicagoGeorge Jacobi, Armour Research FoundationJohn R. Cambridge Massachusetts[edit] Manuel Blum, W. Other participants[edit]