更改

跳到导航 跳到搜索
删除2,318字节 、 2020年11月3日 (二) 15:09
无编辑摘要
第12行: 第12行:       −
of taxonomic ranks, such as: [[domain (biology)|biological domain]] and biosphere, [[Kingdom (biology)|biological kingdom]], [[Phylum]], [[Class (biology)|biological class]], [[Order (biology)|order]], [[Family (biology)|family]], [[genus]] and [[species]]. Because of their dynamic and composition variability, intrinsic "fuzziness",  autopoietic attributes, ability to self-reproduce, and so on, organisms do not fit into the 'standard' definition of general systems, and they are therefore 'super-complex' in both their function and structure; organisms can be thus be defined in CSB only as '[[meta-system]]s' of simpler dynamic systems<ref name="springerlink" /><ref>[http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/MST.html Metasystem Transition Theory], [[Valentin Turchin]], [[Cliff Joslyn]], 1993-1997</ref> Such a meta-system definition of organisms, species, 'ecosystems', and so on, is  not equivalent to the definition of a ''system of systems'' as in [[Autopoiesis|Autopoietic System]]s Theory,;<ref>[http://archonic.net Reflexive Autopoietic Systems Theory]</ref> it also differs from the definition proposed for example by K.D. Palmer in meta-system engineering,<ref>[http://archonic.net/incosewg/ppframe.htm Meta-system Engineering], Kent D. Palmer, 1996</ref> organisms being quite different from machines and [[Automata theory|automata]] with fixed input-output transition functions, or a continuous [[dynamical system]] with fixed [[phase space]],<ref>Hoff, M.A., Roggia, K.G., Menezes, P.B.:(2004). Composition of Transformations: A
+
of taxonomic ranks, such as: [[domain (biology)|biological domain]] and biosphere, [[Kingdom (biology)|biological kingdom]], [[Phylum]], [[Class (biology)|biological class]], [[Order (biology)|order]], [[Family (biology)|family]], [[genus]] and [[species]]. Because of their dynamic and composition variability, intrinsic "fuzziness",  autopoietic attributes, ability to self-reproduce, and so on, organisms do not fit into the 'standard' definition of general systems, and they are therefore 'super-complex' in both their function and structure; organisms can be thus be defined in CSB only as '[[meta-system]]s' of simpler dynamic systems<ref name="springerlink" /><ref>[http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/MST.html Metasystem Transition Theory], [[Valentin Turchin]], [[Cliff Joslyn]], 1993-1997</ref> Such a meta-system definition of organisms, species, 'ecosystems', and so on, is  not equivalent to the definition of a ''system of systems'' as in [[Autopoiesis|Autopoietic System]]s Theory,;<ref>[http://archonic.net Reflexive Autopoietic Systems Theory]</ref> it also differs from the definition proposed for example by K.D. Palmer in meta-system engineering,<ref>[http://archonic.net/incosewg/ppframe.htm Meta-system Engineering], Kent D. Palmer, 1996</ref> organisms being quite different from machines and [[Automata theory|automata]] with fixed input-output transition functions, or a continuous [[dynamical system]] with fixed [[phase space]],<ref>Hoff, M.A., Roggia, K.G., Menezes, P.B.:(2004). Composition of Transformations: A Framework for Systems with Dynamic Topology. ''International Journal of Computing Anticipatory System's'' 14:259–270</ref> contrary to the Cartesian philosophical thinking; thus, organisms cannot be defined merely in terms of a quintuple ''A'' of ''(states, startup state, input and output sets/alphabet, transition function)'',<ref>[[John E. Hopcroft]], [[Rajeev Motwani]], [[Jeffrey D. Ullman]].2000. [[Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation]] (2nd Edition)Pearson Education. {{ISBN|0-201-44124-1}}</ref> although 'non-deterministic automata', as well as 'fuzzy automata' have also been defined. Tessellation or [[cellular automaton|cellular automata]] provide however an intuitive, visual/computational insight into the lower levels of complexity, and have therefore become an increasingly popular, discrete model studied in computability theory, applied mathematics, physics, computer science, theoretical biology/systems biology, cancer simulations and microstructure modeling. Evolving cellular automata using genetic algorithms<ref>The Evolutionary Design of Collective Computation in Cellular Automata, James P. Crutchfeld, Melanie Mitchell, Rajarshi Das (In J. P. Crutchfield and P. K. Schuster (editors), Evolutionary Dynamics|Exploring the Interplay of Selection, Neutrality, Accident, and Function. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.)</ref><ref>Evolving Cellular Automata with Genetic Algorithms: A Review of Recent Work, Melanie Mitchell, James P. Crutchfeld, Rajarshi Das (In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Evolutionary Computation and Its Applications (EvCA'96). Moscow, Russia: Russian Academy of Sciences, 1996.)</ref><ref>{{cite journal | doi = 10.1073/pnas.0307811100 | last1 = Peak | first1 = West | last2 = Messinger | first2 = Mott | year = 2004 | title = Evidence for complex, collective dynamics and emergent, distributed computation in plants | journal = Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA | volume = 101 | issue = 4| pages = 918–922 |bibcode = 2004PNAS..101..918P | pmid = 14732685 | last3 = Messinger | first3 = SM | last4 = Mott | first4 = KA | pmc = 327117}}</ref> is also an emerging field attempting to bridge the gap between the tessellation automata and the higher level complexity approaches in CSB.
   −
of taxonomic ranks, such as: biological domain and biosphere, biological kingdom, Phylum, biological class, order, family, genus and species. Because of their dynamic and composition variability, intrinsic "fuzziness",  autopoietic attributes, ability to self-reproduce, and so on, organisms do not fit into the 'standard' definition of general systems, and they are therefore 'super-complex' in both their function and structure; organisms can be thus be defined in CSB only as 'meta-systems' of simpler dynamic systems Such a meta-system definition of organisms, species, 'ecosystems', and so on, is  not equivalent to the definition of a system of systems as in Autopoietic Systems Theory,; it also differs from the definition proposed for example by K.D. Palmer in meta-system engineering, organisms being quite different from machines and automata with fixed input-output transition functions, or a continuous dynamical system with fixed phase space,<ref>Hoff, M.A., Roggia, K.G., Menezes, P.B.:(2004). Composition of Transformations: A
     −
  −
Framework for Systems with Dynamic Topology. ''International Journal of Computing Anticipatory System's'' 14:259–270</ref> contrary to the Cartesian philosophical thinking; thus, organisms cannot be defined merely in terms of a quintuple ''A'' of ''(states, startup state, input and output sets/alphabet, transition function)'',<ref>[[John E. Hopcroft]], [[Rajeev Motwani]], [[Jeffrey D. Ullman]].2000. [[Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation]] (2nd Edition)Pearson Education. {{ISBN|0-201-44124-1}}</ref> although 'non-deterministic automata', as well as 'fuzzy automata' have also been defined. Tessellation or [[cellular automaton|cellular automata]] provide however an intuitive, visual/computational insight into the lower levels of complexity, and have therefore become an increasingly popular, discrete model studied in computability theory, applied mathematics, physics, computer science, theoretical biology/systems biology, cancer simulations and microstructure modeling. Evolving cellular automata using genetic algorithms<ref>The Evolutionary Design of Collective Computation in Cellular Automata, James P. Crutchfeld, Melanie Mitchell, Rajarshi Das (In J. P. Crutchfield and P. K. Schuster (editors), Evolutionary Dynamics|Exploring the Interplay of Selection, Neutrality, Accident, and Function. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.)</ref><ref>
  −
  −
Framework for Systems with Dynamic Topology. International Journal of Computing Anticipatory System's 14:259–270</ref> contrary to the Cartesian philosophical thinking; thus, organisms cannot be defined merely in terms of a quintuple A of (states, startup state, input and output sets/alphabet, transition function), although 'non-deterministic automata', as well as 'fuzzy automata' have also been defined. Tessellation or cellular automata provide however an intuitive, visual/computational insight into the lower levels of complexity, and have therefore become an increasingly popular, discrete model studied in computability theory, applied mathematics, physics, computer science, theoretical biology/systems biology, cancer simulations and microstructure modeling. Evolving cellular automata using genetic algorithms<ref>
  −
  −
  −
Evolving Cellular Automata with Genetic Algorithms: A Review of Recent Work, Melanie Mitchell, James P. Crutchfeld, Rajarshi Das (In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Evolutionary Computation and Its Applications (EvCA'96). Moscow, Russia: Russian Academy of Sciences, 1996.)</ref><ref>{{cite journal | doi = 10.1073/pnas.0307811100 | last1 = Peak | first1 = West | last2 = Messinger | first2 = Mott | year = 2004 | title = Evidence for complex, collective dynamics and emergent, distributed computation in plants | journal = Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA | volume = 101 | issue = 4| pages = 918–922 |bibcode = 2004PNAS..101..918P | pmid = 14732685 | last3 = Messinger | first3 = SM | last4 = Mott | first4 = KA | pmc = 327117}}</ref> is also an emerging field attempting to bridge the gap between the tessellation automata and the higher level complexity approaches in CSB.
  −
  −
Evolving Cellular Automata with Genetic Algorithms: A Review of Recent Work, Melanie Mitchell, James P. Crutchfeld, Rajarshi Das (In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Evolutionary Computation and Its Applications (EvCA'96). Moscow, Russia: Russian Academy of Sciences, 1996.)</ref> is also an emerging field attempting to bridge the gap between the tessellation automata and the higher level complexity approaches in CSB.
       
7,129

个编辑

导航菜单