From: "Claudio Guerri" <claudioguerri[…]fibertel.com.ar>
To: "Peirce Discussion Forum" <peirce-l[…]lyris.acs.ttu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 7:58 AM
Subject: [peirce-l] New Member

Dear Joseph Ransdell,
I would like to present you a collegue interested in participate in the List.
She is Marcela Lonchuk, Professor of Literature and Communication.
her mail address: marcela.lonchuk[…]fibertel.com.ar

Thanks for devoting so much time to the list
best regards
Claudio Guerri

From: "Jon Awbrey" <jawbrey[…]oakland.edu>
To: "Peirce Discussion Forum" <peirce-l[…]lyris.acs.ttu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 8:46 AM
Subject: [peirce-l] Re: Reductions Among Relations

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
RAR. Note 22
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

Relational Composition as Logical Matrix Multiplication (cont.)

There is another form of representation for 2-adic relations that
is useful to keep in mind, especially for its ability to render the
logic of many complex formulas almost instantly understandable to the
mind's eye. This is the representation in terms of "bipartite graphs",
or "bigraphs" for short.

Here is what G and H look like in the bigraph picture:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
X o o o o o o o
/|\
G / | \
/ | \
X o o o o o o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
X o o o o o o o
\ | /
H \ | /
\|/
X o o o o o o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

G puts 4 in relation to 3, 4, 5.
H puts 3, 4, 5 in relation to 4.

To form the composite relation G o H, we simply follow G by H,
here reading down the page, and "squeeze out the middle man",
that is, we count all of the paths of length two between two
nodes as being equivalent to a directed edge between them in
the composite bigraph for G o H.

Here is how it looks in pictures:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
X o o o o o o o
/|\
G / | \
/ | \
X o o o o o o o
\ | /
H \ | /
\|/
X o o o o o o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

==============================

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
X o o o o o o o
|
G o H |
|
X o o o o o o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Once again we find that G o H = 4:4.

Jon Awbrey

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

---------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Joseph Ransdell" <joseph.ransdell[…]yahoo.com>
To: "Peirce Discussion Forum" <peirce-l[…]lyris.acs.ttu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:19 PM
Subject: [peirce-l] RANSDELL --- Peircean Semiotic and Intelligence Augmentation (with abstract)

Below is the abstract for the Sao Paulo paper on Peirce and Intelligence
Augmentation which I distributed in a truncated form earlier. The paper
itself is attached, in Word format. This is the completed version for the
purposes of the Proceedings volume which the organizers of the Workshop on
Computational Intelligence and Semiotics, Joao Queiroz and Ricardo Gudwin,
are putting out in the form of a CD-ROM.

It turned out to differ more extensively from the final version than I
thought it would: it is substantially the same up through Sec. 6, but
differs significantly from there to the end, though this is chiefly a matter
of organization. I will put it up at Arisbe as well, but it might be a
couple of days before I get it formatted for that. Sorry for the
inconvenience of distributing it in two stages, first incomplete and then
complete but changed in the way indicated. It is not a good practice. I
needed to get something out, I think, in order to get some objectivity on
it, and it did seem to help me in that respect; but still, it was an
imposition on your good will, and I apologize for that.

Now that I have completed this version of it, my time is freed up to respond
to questions already raised about it which I haven't responded to thus far.
I will do so and I will of course be pleased if still further questions or
objections are raised in respect to the version now being distributed. In
order to cover the ground I thought I needed to cover in the paper I had to
make many points in an abbreviated or allusive fashion that I have worked
through much further than I had the space for there. I look forward to
being pressed on anything that strikes you as mistaken or as inadequately
explained.

-------------------------

ABSTRACT

THE RELEVANCE OF PEIRCEAN SEMIOTIC TO
COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE AUGMENTATION

Paper prepared for the Proceedings Volume
for the Workshop on Computational Intelligence and Semiotics
Held at Itaz Cultural Center, Sco Paulo, Brazil
October 8-9, 2002
Organized by Joco Queiroz and Ricardo Gudwin

ABSTRACT: The aim of the present paper is, first, to describe the
distinction of two types of computational intelligence research as Peter
Skagestad has distinguished them: Artificial Intelligence or _AI_ and
Intelligence Augmentation or _IA_; then, second, to draw attention to a
special sort of IA research, namely, computer programming which aims at
supporting, augmenting, and perfecting the critical control of research
communication and publication. Skagestad has been especially concerned to
position Peirce as providing a theoretical basis for IA comparable to the
foundational position of Alan Turing in relation to AI, and he does this by
explaining what is implicit in Peirce_s dictum that _all thought is in sign,
_ which he construes as meaning that all thought is materially embodied,
which he interprets as involving a recognition of the importance of
exosomatic embodiments of mind. In developing Skagestad_s conception of
IA further in the direction indicated I also ground this in Peirce_s dictum,
but I do so by making explicit a different (but complementary) implication
of it, namely, that all thought is dialogical. As an exemplary (but not
prototypical) case of IA of this special sort, I use the automated archive
and server system of primary publication created by the physicist Paul
Ginsparg at Los Alamos National Laboratory some 12 years ago, which is
presently in successful use in the fields of high energy theoretical physics
and several closely associated fields in physics, astronomy, and
mathematics. I argue that a proper understanding of the success of this
system, which can be regarded as an IA application, reveals it to be an
ideal implementation of computationally assisted primary (i.e. formal)
publication. However, the interesting cases for development of IA in this
area will be those that attempt to find out and design computational
assistance for the many varieties of communicational practices involved in
research activity that precede the stage of inquiry at which formal
assertion of putative findings occurs. Interest in these less formal and
rigorous types of communicational practices has yet to develop because they
must be understood in relationship to the formal publication practices, and
these latter have been so poorly understood that there has been no
conceptual framework available for investigating these other and equally
important practices as regards their rationale and needs.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

END OF DIGEST 12-12-02