The preceding analyses demonstrate the usefulness of the fine-grained cognitive cycle of the IDA model as an aid to thinking about cognitive processes, as well as a source of testable hypotheses. (See Franklin & Graesser 2001; Baars and Franklin 2003 for more such hypotheses.) Though it integrates a larger set of cognitive processes than other models, this approach is by no means complete. . We expect to fill in further gaps as time and energy permit.
Predictable skills tend to become more automatic, that is less conscious, with practice. When such automatized procedures repeatedly fail, conscious access tends to return. The IDA model’s account of these processes is the subject of a separate article (Negatu, McCauley and Franklin, in review).
Every agent must sample and act on its world through a sense-select-act (or stimulus, cognition, response) cycle. The IDA/GW model hypothesizes for us humans a complex , involving perception, several memory systems, attention and action selection, that samples the world at five to ten times a second. This frequent sampling allows for an exceptionally fine grained analysis of common cognitive phenomena such as process dissociation, recognition vs. recall, and the availability heuristic. At a high level of abstraction, these analyses, which are included in the paper, support the commonly held explanations of what is generally found in studies of the explicit (i.e., conscious and reportable) components of memory processes (e.g. Tulving, 1985; Baddeley et al, 2001). Nothing new here. At a finer grained level, however, our analyses flesh out these common explanations, adding detail and functional mechanisms. Therein lies the value of our analyses.
We noticed above that Mithraism’s original, archetypal sacred space was thought to be a cave. This perception, reported by an external source (the third-century CE philosopher Porphyry), is corroborated by internal data and the archaeological evidence. The Mithraists did indeed call their meeting places “caves,” whether they actually were or not. Natural caves were used where available; and where not, especially in urban settings (Rome, Ostia), a room or suite of rooms within some larger structure was used and sometimes decorated so as to resemble a natural cave. Mithraea (our modern term), like natural caves and unlike most constructed temples, had no elaborate or even recognizable exteriors. (On the structure of the mithraeum see White 1990: pp. 47-59.)
Thenext thing to do was to find an outcrop of rock deposited in the deep oceanwhere the K-T boundary was well exposed and paleontologists were sure itwas properly identified.
In Smolins model, what occurs there is a bounce that produces a new daughter universe, one with fundamental parameters that are stochastically different from the parent universe.
Collections of primitive behavior codelets form . This corresponds to collections of processors forming goal contexts in global workspace theory. Behaviors also have pre- and post-conditions derived from those of their underlying codelets. The activation of a behavior is always the sum of the activations of its codelets. Thus, behaviors acquire activation for their codelets. They may also receive activation from other behaviors that they must share with their codelets.
As we have seen, the explanation LOTH offers depends on theexploitation of the notion of logical form or syntactic structuredetermined by the combinatorial syntax postulated for therepresentational system. The combinatorial syntax not only gives us acriterion of well-formedness for mental expressions, but it alsodefines the logical form or syntactic structure for each well-formedexpression. The classical solution to inferential systematicity is tomake the mental operations on representations sensitive to their formor structure, i.e., to insist on (B2). Since, from a syntactic viewpoint, similarly formed expressions will have similar forms, it ispossible to define a single operation which will apply to only certainexpressions that have a certain form, say, only to conjunctions, orconditionals. This allows the LOT theorist to give homogeneousexplanations of what appear to be homogeneous classes of inferentialcapacities. This is one of the greatest virtues of LOTH, henceprovides an argument for it.
Collections of behaviors, called , with activation passing links between them, correspond to goal context hierarchies in global workspace theory. They can be thought of as partial plans of actions. Also during Step 7, behavior streams are instantiated into an on going, activation passing, . In Step 8 of each cycle, the behavior net chooses exactly one behavior to execute. The behavior net is IDA’s action selection mechanism. More details of the operation of this action selection mechanism have been published elsewhere (Negatu and Franklin 2002).
In the IDA model codelets have preconditions that must be satisfied in order that the codelet can act. They also have post-conditions that are expected after the actions take place. Each codelet also has a numerical activation that roughly measures its relevance and importance to the current situation. Part of this activation is base-level activation similar to that described for slipnet nodes above. Behavior codelets acquire environmental activation during Step 7 of each cognitive cycle (see above) in proportion to their preconditions being satisfied. In that same step, a behavior codelet may receive activation if its post-conditions help to satisfy some goal or drive as implemented by an emotion or feeling.
Our account also employs Edelman’s notion of , postulating that several different neuronal groups can accomplish roughly the same task. In the IDA conceptual model, the repertoire of behavior codelets is also taken to be degenerate. Thus, two distinct behavior streams may be partial plans with the same goal, but may employ different behaviors to get there. Procedural learning in the IDA conceptual model is the consciously driven process of shaping a behavior stream via reinforcement.
In the 1980s, theorists in quantum gravity began postulating that our universe might give birth to new universes via fluctuations in spacetime over very short distances (Baum 1983; Strominger 1984; Hawking 1987, 1988, 1993; Coleman 1988).