4E cognition refers to a group of theories in (the philosophy of) cognitive science that challenge traditional views of the mind as something that happens only inside the brain. The four Es stand for: embodied, meaning that a brain is found in and, more importantly, vitally interconnected with a larger physical/biological body; embedded, which refers to the limitations placed on the body by the external environment and laws of nature; extended, which argues that the mind is supplemented and even enhanced by the exterior world (e.g., writing, a calculator, etc.); and enactive, which is the argument that without dynamic processes, actions that require reactions, the mind would be ineffectual. It could be argued that the four Es are compounding extensions of cognition or the mind, being part of a body that is, in turn, part of an environment which limits it but also allows for certain extensions, all of which require dynamic actions and reactions. == History == Ideas of embodied cognition, or rather the idea that our physical bodies play a crucial role in our decision making, can be traced back as far as Plato's dialogues and Aristotelian thought. It was, however, in the twentieth century that this debate began to resemble the current discussion, fueled by disagreements between cognitivists and behaviourists. Tensions within cognitivism, as well as the increasing popularity of neurobiology, led, on the one side, to a predominant focus on internal, cognitive processes while neglecting environmental factors, which in turn caused a push-back fuelling our modern understanding of embodied cognition. The term 4E cognition is hard to trace back to its first use, however, some sources attribute it to Shaun Gallagher and the conference on 4E cognition he organised in 2007, while others indicate the term to be first used in 2006 at an 'Embodied mind workshop' at Cardiff University that Gallagher attended. Embodiment or embodied cognition arguably presents the bridge between cognitivism and 4E cognition as the embodiment of cognitive function provides the necessary conditions for embeddedness, enactedness, and extendedness to connect to cognition. 4E cognition was and is heavily influenced by phenomenology. The ideas are still rather fragmented in nature due to their four main components, which can not be neatly divided, causing conceptual questions of internal boundary concepts. As a young field, it is held back both by its fragmented nature and a relative lack of critical evaluations. It is important to acknowledge that 4E cognition, though young, is a broad field containing and combining several different theoretical perspectives that conflict with one another to varying degrees. The somewhat convoluted and competing nature of the theories that can be grouped as 4E cognition, as well as the field's relative youth, make it difficult to put together an exhaustive history beyond the history of its four main theoretical pillars: embodiment, embeddedness, extendedness, and enactedness. == Importance and core tenets of 4E == If there are separate theories of cognition (e.g., embodied, extended, etc.), why group them under this umbrella, causing important epistemological and especially ontological dilemmas? Notably, other theories of 'non-traditional' cognition are not included under the 4E umbrella. The four E's in 4E cognition importantly all reject, or at a minimum draw into question, some of the core tenets of traditional cognitivism. Importantly, 4E cognition is seen as deindividualizing cognition to some extent, allowing for a broader examination of the interplay of personal, social, political, and ethical aspects that shape human cognition. This can be compared to advancements in the field of epigenetics, which have allowed for a broader examination of environmental (both natural and social) factors and their influence on what had previously only been subject to genetic theorizing. In a similar vein, 4E cognition might also help ground cognition in evolutionary theory by extending cognition to a biological account subject to development over time by means of evolution. Overall, the importance of the extension that is 4E cognition aims to reexamine ideas of a self-centered view of cognition, advocating for a more holistic approach. Ideally, this would allow us to reconsider ideas of justice and individual rights and responsibilities that take into account a more nuanced understanding of the relations between people and their context, balancing self-agency with factors beyond it. === Conceptual differences from cognitive psychology === According to the traditional teachings of cognitive psychology, cognition is a type of information processing based on representational mental structures. This idea, as the name suggests, was heavily influenced by computer science. In this light, the brain is a kind of central processing unit that organises and directs all else. The classical cognitivist view draws a strong boundary between 'the internal' and 'the external', where cognition is solely a subject of 'the internal' realm. The four E's, however, break down this boundary. Cognition can not reside solely within the confines of our heads if it is also embodied, embedded, enacted, and extended. In a way, 4E cognition is interested in the extracranial processes affecting cognition. == From embodied cognition to 4E cognition == === The strong and the weak view === ==== Embodied cognition ==== Broadly speaking, there is a strong and a weak perspective of embodied cognition in 4E cognition. The weak understanding refers to mental processes being causally dependent on extracranial processes. This essentially means that there is a cause and effect or action-reaction relationship between the mind and the body and its environment, etc. The strong perspective views extracranial processes as a (partial) constitutive aspect of cognition. An example here could be using a calculator to solve math problems. The calculator is not part of your brain or mind, but it supports your cognitive processes. === Extracranial processes: bodily or extrabodily === In addition to the weak and the strong reading of 4E cognition, there is also the distinction between bodily and extrabodily extracranial processes. Bodily extracranial processes refer to processes within the body, e.g., sensory perception. Extrabodily extracranial processes refer to processes outside of the body, like the aforementioned calculator example. === Four claims of embodied cognition === ==== Embedded and extended cognition ==== When combining the weak/strong reading of embodied cognition and bodily/extrabodily extracranial process, four claims about embodied cognition emerge: strongly embodied and bodily processes strongly embodied and extrabodily processes weakly embodied and bodily processes weakly embodied and extrabodily processes The first and third claims signify a strong and a weak reading of embodied cognition in the more classical sense. The second claim fits almost perfectly with embedded cognition. Claim two is most compatible with extended cognition. ==== Enacted cognition ==== Finally, enacted cognition refers to cognition being connected to active interaction between a conscious agent and their environment. Here, too, there can be a weak and a strong reading. == Criticisms == Given the divided nature of the field, much criticism surrounding the lack of unity within the field has emerged. In particular, the claims of embodied cognition centering around the body appear to conflict with the tenets of extended cognition, which also appear to conflict with the body/environment distinction that is central to enactivism. Some theoreticians argue that the umbrella of 4E theories is still lacking a common language that might bridge the gaps between the theories that constitute it. There is also the concern that the grouping of such variable theories results in an important loss of nuance and complexity, which is a part of human cognition. Another concern raised is the "dogma of harmony". The criticism contained there regards the notion that within 4E theorizing, there is generally an optimistic and harmonic expectation of the extension between humans and their technologies, ignoring the possibility of those extensions detracting from cognition in some way rather than adding to it. Recent attempts to incorporate embodied cognitive neuroscience have been argued to hold the potential to resolve internal issues within 4E cognition. Overall, a concern often voiced regarding 4E cognition is that its proponents are at best only vaguely interested in cognition. More broadly, this concern reflects the arguably too distracted nature of this emerging field.
Physicalization
Physicalization of computer hardware (the opposite of virtualization), is a way to place multiple physical machines in a rack unit. It can be a way to reduce hardware costs, since in some cases, server processors cost more per core than energy efficient laptop processors, which may make up for added cost of board level integration. While Moore's law makes increasing integration less expensive, some jobs require much I/O bandwidth, which may be less expensive to provide using many less-integrated processors. Applications and services that are I/O bound are likely to benefit from such physicalized environments. This ensures that each operating system instance is running on a processor that has its own network interface card, host bus and I/O sub-system unlike in the case of a multi-core servers where a single I/O sub-system is shared between all the cores / VMs.
BL (logic)
In mathematical logic, basic fuzzy logic (or shortly BL), the logic of the continuous t-norms, is one of the t-norm fuzzy logics. It belongs to the broader class of substructural logics, or logics of residuated lattices; it extends the logic MTL of all left-continuous t-norms. == Syntax == === Language === The language of the propositional logic BL consists of countably many propositional variables and the following primitive logical connectives: Implication → {\displaystyle \rightarrow } (binary) Strong conjunction ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } (binary). The sign & is a more traditional notation for strong conjunction in the literature on fuzzy logic, while the notation ⊗ {\displaystyle \otimes } follows the tradition of substructural logics. Bottom ⊥ {\displaystyle \bot } (nullary — a propositional constant); 0 {\displaystyle 0} or 0 ¯ {\displaystyle {\overline {0}}} are common alternative signs and zero a common alternative name for the propositional constant (as the constants bottom and zero of substructural logics coincide in MTL). The following are the most common defined logical connectives: Weak conjunction ∧ {\displaystyle \wedge } (binary), also called lattice conjunction (as it is always realized by the lattice operation of meet in algebraic semantics). Unlike MTL and weaker substructural logics, weak conjunction is definable in BL as A ∧ B ≡ A ⊗ ( A → B ) {\displaystyle A\wedge B\equiv A\otimes (A\rightarrow B)} Negation ¬ {\displaystyle \neg } (unary), defined as ¬ A ≡ A → ⊥ {\displaystyle \neg A\equiv A\rightarrow \bot } Equivalence ↔ {\displaystyle \leftrightarrow } (binary), defined as A ↔ B ≡ ( A → B ) ∧ ( B → A ) {\displaystyle A\leftrightarrow B\equiv (A\rightarrow B)\wedge (B\rightarrow A)} As in MTL, the definition is equivalent to ( A → B ) ⊗ ( B → A ) . {\displaystyle (A\rightarrow B)\otimes (B\rightarrow A).} (Weak) disjunction ∨ {\displaystyle \vee } (binary), also called lattice disjunction (as it is always realized by the lattice operation of join in algebraic semantics), defined as A ∨ B ≡ ( ( A → B ) → B ) ∧ ( ( B → A ) → A ) {\displaystyle A\vee B\equiv ((A\rightarrow B)\rightarrow B)\wedge ((B\rightarrow A)\rightarrow A)} Top ⊤ {\displaystyle \top } (nullary), also called one and denoted by 1 {\displaystyle 1} or 1 ¯ {\displaystyle {\overline {1}}} (as the constants top and zero of substructural logics coincide in MTL), defined as ⊤ ≡ ⊥ → ⊥ {\displaystyle \top \equiv \bot \rightarrow \bot } Well-formed formulae of BL are defined as usual in propositional logics. In order to save parentheses, it is common to use the following order of precedence: Unary connectives (bind most closely) Binary connectives other than implication and equivalence Implication and equivalence (bind most loosely) === Axioms === A Hilbert-style deduction system for BL has been introduced by Petr Hájek (1998). Its single derivation rule is modus ponens: from A {\displaystyle A} and A → B {\displaystyle A\rightarrow B} derive B . {\displaystyle B.} The following are its axiom schemata: ( B L 1 ) : ( A → B ) → ( ( B → C ) → ( A → C ) ) ( B L 2 ) : A ⊗ B → A ( B L 3 ) : A ⊗ B → B ⊗ A ( B L 4 ) : A ⊗ ( A → B ) → B ⊗ ( B → A ) ( B L 5 a ) : ( A → ( B → C ) ) → ( A ⊗ B → C ) ( B L 5 b ) : ( A ⊗ B → C ) → ( A → ( B → C ) ) ( B L 6 ) : ( ( A → B ) → C ) → ( ( ( B → A ) → C ) → C ) ( B L 7 ) : ⊥ → A {\displaystyle {\begin{array}{ll}{\rm {(BL1)}}\colon &(A\rightarrow B)\rightarrow ((B\rightarrow C)\rightarrow (A\rightarrow C))\\{\rm {(BL2)}}\colon &A\otimes B\rightarrow A\\{\rm {(BL3)}}\colon &A\otimes B\rightarrow B\otimes A\\{\rm {(BL4)}}\colon &A\otimes (A\rightarrow B)\rightarrow B\otimes (B\rightarrow A)\\{\rm {(BL5a)}}\colon &(A\rightarrow (B\rightarrow C))\rightarrow (A\otimes B\rightarrow C)\\{\rm {(BL5b)}}\colon &(A\otimes B\rightarrow C)\rightarrow (A\rightarrow (B\rightarrow C))\\{\rm {(BL6)}}\colon &((A\rightarrow B)\rightarrow C)\rightarrow (((B\rightarrow A)\rightarrow C)\rightarrow C)\\{\rm {(BL7)}}\colon &\bot \rightarrow A\end{array}}} The axioms (BL2) and (BL3) of the original axiomatic system were shown to be redundant (Chvalovský, 2012) and (Cintula, 2005). All the other axioms were shown to be independent (Chvalovský, 2012). == Semantics == Like in other propositional t-norm fuzzy logics, algebraic semantics is predominantly used for BL, with three main classes of algebras with respect to which the logic is complete: General semantics, formed of all BL-algebras — that is, all algebras for which the logic is sound Linear semantics, formed of all linear BL-algebras — that is, all BL-algebras whose lattice order is linear Standard semantics, formed of all standard BL-algebras — that is, all BL-algebras whose lattice reduct is the real unit interval [0, 1] with the usual order; they are uniquely determined by the function that interprets strong conjunction, which can be any continuous t-norm.
AI Action Summit 2025
The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Action Summit (French: Sommet pour l'action sur l'intelligence artificielle or Sommet pour l'action sur l'IA, SAIA) was held at the Grand Palais in Paris, France, from 10 to 11 February 2025. The summit was co-chaired by French President Emmanuel Macron and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The 2025 AI Action Summit followed the 2023 AI Safety Summit hosted at Bletchley Park in the UK, and the 2024 AI Seoul Summit in South Korea. This series of AI summits continued with the AI Impact Summit in Delhi, which was hosted by India in February 2026. Whereas the 2023 AI Safety Summit was attended by representatives from 29 governments and executives from only a handful of AI companies, over 1,000 participants from more than 100 countries attended the 2025 Paris AI Summit, representing government leaders, international organisations, the academic and research community, the private sector, and civil society. == Background == The First International AI Safety Report was published on 29 January 2025. Commissioned after the Bletchley Park AI Safety Summit, the report focused on the risks and threats posed by general-purpose AI, and was slated for discussion at the Paris summit as part of the "Trust in AI" pillar. Whereas the first summit was focused on the catastrophic risks of AI and their mitigation, the Paris meeting was recast as an "AI Action Summit" emphasising innovation, practical implementation, and potential economic opportunities of AI, while also exploring a broader range of risks including its environmental impact and disruptions to the labour market. In the weeks leading up to the Paris summit, government leaders had also started to rally around "national champions" in AI, partly in response to Chinese AI startup DeepSeek, which had released a new model rivalling OpenAI o1. On Sunday 9 February, French President Emmanuel Macron posted a compilation of AI-generated deepfake video clips of himself on Instagram to help publicise the start of the 2025 AI Action Summit the following day. While acknowledging the humour of the deepfakes, the real Macron states in the video that using artificial intelligence, "we can do some very big things: change healthcare, energy, life in our society". == Proceedings == === Day 1 === In her opening address, French special envoy Anne Bouverot discussed the environmental impact of AI, acknowledging the technology's "current trajectory is unsustainable". General secretary Christy Hoffman of the UNI Global Union said that "AI-driven productivity gains risk turning the technology into yet another engine of inequality, further straining our democracies". Chinese Vice Premier Zhang Guoqing made a speech expressing China's willingness "to work with other countries to promote development, safeguard security, and share achievements in the field of artificial intelligence". Google CEO Sundar Pichai said in his speech that while the rise of AI brings many risks, "The biggest risk is missing out". He discussed Google's long track record of AI research and said that the company is investing further into "deep research" agents that can autonomously search the Internet and compile a full analysis for users. A new coalition, the Robust Open Online Safety Tools (ROOST) initiative, debuted at the summit. Supported by Google, Discord, OpenAI, and Roblox, and incubated at the Institute of Global Politics at Columbia University, the organisation is developing free, open-source tools to detect and report child sexual abuse material (CSAM). In his speech closing the first day, President Emmanuel Macron emphasized that France has the capability to deliver the power required by AI companies, thanks to its production of nuclear energy. While declaring that Europe was "back in the race" for AI, Macron said that the region was "too slow" for investors, and called on the EU to "simplify regulation" and "resynchronize with the rest of the world". === Day 2 === On 11 February 2025, the French government announced its $400 million endowment of Current AI, a new foundation to support the creation of AI "public goods" including high-quality datasets and open-source tools and infrastructure. Launched by President Macron, Current AI is backed by nine governments – Finland, France, Germany, Chile, India, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, Slovenia, and Switzerland – plus various philanthropic organisations such as the Omidyar Group and the McGovern Foundation, and private companies such as Google and Salesforce. Another initiative launched at the summit was the Coalition for Sustainable AI. Led by France, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the coalition has the support of 11 countries, five international organisations, and 37 tech companies including EDF, IBM, Nvidia, and SAP. The Summit of Heads of State and Government took place with a plenary session in the Grand Palais. Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India stressed the need to "democratise technology" and "[ensure] access to all, especially in the Global South". Vice President JD Vance of the United States used his speech to warn against "excessive regulation of the AI" which "could kill a transformative sector just as it's taking off". Vance also warned other leaders against cooperating with "authoritarian regimes" on AI, a comment widely interpreted as a reference to China. == Investments == At the summit, the European Union made several announcements related to planned investments supporting AI development. President Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission launched InvestAI, a €200 billion initiative, including €20 billion to build four AI gigafactories to train highly complex, very large models. In addition, a coalition of more than 60 European companies launched the EU AI Champions Initiative. Led by venture capital firm General Catalyst, the coalition plans to invest €150 billion in AI-related businesses and infrastructure in Europe over five years. President Emmanuel Macron announced that private investors had pledged to invest nearly €110 billion in the AI sector in France. Financing of between €30 and €50 billion is expected from the United Arab Emirates to build a very large data centre campus, with another €20 billion from the Canadian investment firm Brookfield Corporation. French startup Mistral AI and Helsing, a German-British company, announced their partnership in developing vision-language-action models helping soldiers use AI on the battlefield. == Reactions == The Financial Times editorial board noted that the Paris summit "highlighted a shift in the dynamics towards geopolitical competition", which it characterised as "a new AI arms race" between the US and China, with Europe "trying to carve out its role". Fortune.com AI editor Jeremy Kahn described the 2025 Paris Summit as an "AI festival, complete with glitzy corporate side events and even a late night dance party", contrasting it with the "decidedly sober" mood of the inaugural AI Safety Summit at Bletchley Park. Many experts of the AI Safety Community expressed disappointment that the Paris Summit did not do enough to address AI risks, with Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei calling it a "missed opportunity". Others voicing similar concerns included David Leslie of the Alan Turing Institute and Max Tegmark of the Future of Life Institute. Reporting from Paris, technology columnist Kevin Roose of The New York Times wrote, "The biggest surprise of the Paris summit, for me, has been that policymakers can't seem to grasp how soon powerful AI systems could arrive, or how disruptive they could be." == Statement on inclusive and sustainable AI == At the summit, 58 countries, including France, China, and India, signed a joint declaration, the Statement on Inclusive and Sustainable Artificial Intelligence for People and the Planet. The statement outlines general principles such as accessibility and overcoming the digital divide; developing AI that is open, transparent, ethical, safe, and trustworthy; avoiding market concentration of AI development to encourage innovation; positive outcomes for labour markets; making AI sustainable; and promoting international cooperation and governance. The US and UK refused to sign the declaration on inclusive and sustainable AI. The UK government said in a brief statement that the international agreement did not go far enough in defining global governance of AI and addressing concerns about its impact on national security. === Signatories === The list of signatory countries to the statement for inclusive and sustainable AI in alphabetical order: Additional signatories included the following international bodies and research institutes: ALAI (Latin American Association on Internet) African Union (AU) Commission BEUC The European Consumer Organisation Center for Democracy and Technology Council of Europe European Commission (and the 27 member states) Hugging Face INRIA Institute of Advanced Study OEC
Gene expression programming
Gene expression programming (GEP) in computer programming is an evolutionary algorithm that creates computer programs or models. These computer programs are complex tree structures that learn and adapt by changing their sizes, shapes, and composition, much like a living organism. And like living organisms, the computer programs of GEP are also encoded in simple linear chromosomes of fixed length. Thus, GEP is a genotype–phenotype system, benefiting from a simple genome to keep and transmit the genetic information and a complex phenotype to explore the environment and adapt to it. == Background == Evolutionary algorithms use populations of individuals, select individuals according to fitness, and introduce genetic variation using one or more genetic operators. Their use in artificial computational systems dates back to the 1950s where they were used to solve optimization problems (e.g. Box 1957 and Friedman 1959). But it was with the introduction of evolution strategies by Rechenberg in 1965 that evolutionary algorithms gained popularity. A good overview text on evolutionary algorithms is the book "An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms" by Mitchell (1996). Gene expression programming belongs to the family of evolutionary algorithms and is closely related to genetic algorithms and genetic programming. From genetic algorithms it inherited the linear chromosomes of fixed length; and from genetic programming it inherited the expressive parse trees of varied sizes and shapes. In gene expression programming the linear chromosomes work as the genotype and the parse trees as the phenotype, creating a genotype/phenotype system. This genotype/phenotype system is multigenic, thus encoding multiple parse trees in each chromosome. This means that the computer programs created by GEP are composed of multiple parse trees. Because these parse trees are the result of gene expression, in GEP they are called expression trees. Masood Nekoei, et al. utilized this expression programming style in ABC optimization to conduct ABCEP as a method that outperformed other evolutionary algorithms.ABCEP == Encoding: the genotype == The genome of gene expression programming consists of a linear, symbolic string or chromosome of fixed length composed of one or more genes of equal size. These genes, despite their fixed length, code for expression trees of different sizes and shapes. An example of a chromosome with two genes, each of size 9, is the string (position zero indicates the start of each gene): 012345678012345678 L+a-baccdcLabacd where “L” represents the natural logarithm function and “a”, “b”, “c”, and “d” represent the variables and constants used in a problem. == Expression trees: the phenotype == As shown above, the genes of gene expression programming have all the same size. However, these fixed length strings code for expression trees of different sizes. This means that the size of the coding regions varies from gene to gene, allowing for adaptation and evolution to occur smoothly. For example, the mathematical expression: ( a − b ) ( c + d ) {\displaystyle {\sqrt {(a-b)(c+d)}}\,} can also be represented as an expression tree: where "Q” represents the square root function. This kind of expression tree consists of the phenotypic expression of GEP genes, whereas the genes are linear strings encoding these complex structures. For this particular example, the linear string corresponds to: 01234567 Q-+abcd which is the straightforward reading of the expression tree from top to bottom and from left to right. These linear strings are called k-expressions (from Karva notation). Going from k-expressions to expression trees is also very simple. For example, the following k-expression: 01234567890 Qb+baQba is composed of two different terminals (the variables “a” and “b”), two different functions of two arguments (“” and “+”), and a function of one argument (“Q”). Its expression gives: == K-expressions and genes == The k-expressions of gene expression programming correspond to the region of genes that gets expressed. This means that there might be sequences in the genes that are not expressed, which is indeed true for most genes. The reason for these noncoding regions is to provide a buffer of terminals so that all k-expressions encoded in GEP genes correspond always to valid programs or expressions. The genes of gene expression programming are therefore composed of two different domains – a head and a tail – each with different properties and functions. The head is used mainly to encode the functions and variables chosen to solve the problem at hand, whereas the tail, while also used to encode the variables, provides essentially a reservoir of terminals to ensure that all programs are error-free. For GEP genes the length of the tail is given by the formula: t = h ( n max − 1 ) + 1 {\displaystyle t=h(n_{\max }-1)+1} where h is the head's length and nmax is maximum arity. For example, for a gene created using the set of functions F = {Q, +, −, ∗, /} and the set of terminals T = {a, b}, nmax = 2. And if we choose a head length of 15, then t = 15 (2–1) + 1 = 16, which gives a gene length g of 15 + 16 = 31. The randomly generated string below is an example of one such gene: 0123456789012345678901234567890 b+a-aQab+//+b+babbabbbababbaaa It encodes the expression tree: which, in this case, only uses 8 of the 31 elements that constitute the gene. It's not hard to see that, despite their fixed length, each gene has the potential to code for expression trees of different sizes and shapes, with the simplest composed of only one node (when the first element of a gene is a terminal) and the largest composed of as many nodes as there are elements in the gene (when all the elements in the head are functions with maximum arity). It's also not hard to see that it is trivial to implement all kinds of genetic modification (mutation, inversion, insertion, recombination, and so on) with the guarantee that all resulting offspring encode correct, error-free programs. == Multigenic chromosomes == The chromosomes of gene expression programming are usually composed of more than one gene of equal length. Each gene codes for a sub-expression tree (sub-ET) or sub-program. Then the sub-ETs can interact with one another in different ways, forming a more complex program. The figure shows an example of a program composed of three sub-ETs. In the final program the sub-ETs could be linked by addition or some other function, as there are no restrictions to the kind of linking function one might choose. Some examples of more complex linkers include taking the average, the median, the midrange, thresholding their sum to make a binomial classification, applying the sigmoid function to compute a probability, and so on. These linking functions are usually chosen a priori for each problem, but they can also be evolved elegantly and efficiently by the cellular system of gene expression programming. == Cells and code reuse == In gene expression programming, homeotic genes control the interactions of the different sub-ETs or modules of the main program. The expression of such genes results in different main programs or cells, that is, they determine which genes are expressed in each cell and how the sub-ETs of each cell interact with one another. In other words, homeotic genes determine which sub-ETs are called upon and how often in which main program or cell and what kind of connections they establish with one another. === Homeotic genes and the cellular system === Homeotic genes have exactly the same kind of structural organization as normal genes and they are built using an identical process. They also contain a head domain and a tail domain, with the difference that the heads contain now linking functions and a special kind of terminals – genic terminals – that represent the normal genes. The expression of the normal genes results as usual in different sub-ETs, which in the cellular system are called ADFs (automatically defined functions). As for the tails, they contain only genic terminals, that is, derived features generated on the fly by the algorithm. For example, the chromosome in the figure has three normal genes and one homeotic gene and encodes a main program that invokes three different functions a total of four times, linking them in a particular way. From this example it is clear that the cellular system not only allows the unconstrained evolution of linking functions but also code reuse. And it shouldn't be hard to implement recursion in this system. === Multiple main programs and multicellular systems === Multicellular systems are composed of more than one homeotic gene. Each homeotic gene in this system puts together a different combination of sub-expression trees or ADFs, creating multiple cells or main programs. For example, the program shown in the figure was created using a cellular system with two cells and three normal genes. The applications of these multicellular systems are mu
Agent Ruby
Agent Ruby (1998–2002) by Lynn Hershman Leeson is an interactive, multiuser work using artificial intelligence. == Description == On Agent Ruby's website, "Agent Ruby's Edream Portal," a female face moves her eyes and lips. Ruby, named from Hershman Leeson's own film, Teknolust, answers questions and often responds that she needs a better algorithm to answer questions not within her database. The work, created with AI, explores relationships between real and virtual worlds. Hershman Leeson had created an earlier version of Ruby, CyberRoberta, which was a custom-made doll with webcam eyes that interacted with the internet. The work in a gallery provides a screen and a sign inviting gallery-goers to "Chat with Ruby." == Artificial intelligence == In 2015 when Agent Ruby was exhibited at the gallery Modern Art Oxford, a review in Aesthetica Magazine described it as an artificial intelligence agent. A review in New Scientist noted that "Ruby is a fast learner, but perhaps not a natural conversationalist." A 2024 list of "25 Essential AI Artworks" published by ARTnews wrote that while "Agent Ruby's capabilities seem limited by today's standards," it was extensive for its day. == Publications and exhibitions == Agent Ruby was commissioned and displayed at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, Modern Art Oxford, and the ZKM Center for Art and Media in Karlsruhe, Germany. The San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA) presented Lynn Hershman Leeson: The Agent Ruby Files, March 30 through June 2, 2013 which presented the project server's archive of user conversations over the 12 years of exhibitions.
Fragile Dreams: Farewell Ruins of the Moon
Fragile Dreams: Farewell Ruins of the Moon (フラジール ～さよなら月の廃墟～, Furajīru: Sayonara Tsuki no Haikyo; known in Japan as Fragile) is an action role-playing game for the Wii developed by Namco Bandai Games in co-operation with Tri-Crescendo. The game was released by Namco Bandai Games in Japan on January 22, 2009. It was later published by Xseed Games in North America on March 16, 2010, and in Europe by Rising Star Games on March 19, 2010, followed by its release in Australia on April 1, 2010. == Gameplay == In Fragile Dreams, the player character, Seto, must traverse the ruins of Tokyo and the surrounding areas, fighting off ghosts that lurk within these ruins. The game's heads-up display includes a mini-map and HP gauge for Seto's location and health, respectively. Seto will fall unconscious if his HP reaches zero, resulting in a game over. The player controls Seto from a third-person perspective with the Wii Remote and Nunchuk. Seto can use his flashlight (controlled by the Wii Remote pointer) to illuminate his surroundings or solve puzzles and interact with the environment. When searching for certain objectives or hidden enemies, pointing Seto's light in their direction picks up and plays their sounds through the Wii Remote's mini speaker. The Wii Nunchuk, meanwhile, directly controls Seto's movement: aside of basic movement, he can crouch to hide and crawl through small spaces. Seto will often come across damaged floors, which require slow movement (and for heavily damaged floors, crouching) to cross without falling through. As Seto, the player can use weapons found throughout the world to fight off ghosts, ranging from slingshots and golf clubs to crossbows and katanas. Each weapon can only take a certain amount of use: once a weapon reaches its limit, it will break after battle. The player can also find other usable and collectable items in the field, marked with fireflies. The player can only save their game by resting at small fire pits scattered throughout the world: used fire pits are marked with a bonfire. The player can also examine and identify Mystery Items, organize their inventory, as well as after encountering the Merchant, buy and sell items. As stated by the producer of the game, Kentarō Kawashima, Fragile Dreams is not strictly a survival horror: rather, its story focuses on human drama. In Fragile Dreams, aside of the main story, the player can find and examine objects and graffiti throughout the world. Objects called memory items (ranging from origami and stones to cell phones and books) hold the memories of their former owners (only accessible at bonfires), while the graffiti contains messages only seen by pointing at them in first-person. By examining these messages, the player can piece together hints to the game's backstory. == Story == === Setting and characters === Fragile Dreams is set in a post-apocalyptic version of Earth in the near-future. Almost all the world's population has vanished, leaving the surviving buildings and structures abandoned. The game is set in and near the ruins of Tokyo, Japan, where the event that nearly wiped out humanity may have originated. The protagonist, Seto, is a 15-year-old boy who searches the world for other living humans. He encounters Ren, a silver-haired girl who often leaves behind large, cryptic drawings. Other characters include: Sai, the ghost of a young woman; Crow, a mischievous and straightforward amnesiac boy; Personal Frame (P.F.), a portable computer who loves having conversations more than anything else; Chiyo, the ghost of a little girl; and the Merchant, a mysterious yet merry man who trades various goods. The game's host of enemies mainly consist of ghosts, but also include humanoid robots and security proxies. The main antagonist, Shin, is the AI of a scientist who considers speech to be an inferior means of communication. Various memory items include a greater set of characters, each giving hints to the game's backstory. === Plot === At the end of Seto's fifteenth summer, his grandfather dies. Seto buries him in front of their home, an old observatory, and that from then on he became "truly alone". At night, he searches for anything the old man had left for him and discovers a letter, along with a strange blue stone in a locket. Suddenly, a mask-like ghost appears and attacks Seto. After driving the creature off, Seto reads the old man's letter, who tells him to "reach a tall red tower" east of the observatory, where he might find other survivors. After departing for the tower, Seto reaches an old subway entrance in the Azabudai district and finds Ren sitting on a collapsed pillar, singing to the stars. He accidentally startles her and the frightened Ren flees into the subway station: getting over the shock of meeting another person, Seto follows her. While searching the station, he discovers a Personal Frame, who guides him towards Ren. Unfortunately, just as they reach the exit, P.F.'s battery dies out: Seto buries the device, keeping a screw from it in his locket. From the underground, Seto finds himself at an abandoned amusement park and encounters Crow, who steals Seto's locket. After a long chase across the park and another encounter with the masked ghost, Crow returns Seto's locket and directs him to a hotel nearby, where he saw a girl who might know something about Ren. Crow also gives Seto his skull ring to keep in his locket and kisses him. At the hotel, Seto encounters Sai and fights the masked ghost again. After laying to rest the spirit of an old woman named Chiyo, the two discover Ren's drawings by a sewer. Returning to the underground, Seto and Sai find themselves at a hydropower dam. While searching for Ren, Seto discovers that Crow is actually a robot, but his battery begins to fail and Seto mourns for him as he "die[s]". Finally, they encounter Ren in a cell: although glad to see him again, Ren runs off after Shin calls. Sai explains to Seto that most of humanity died because of a "human empathy expansion project" called Glass Cage. The project was meant to make human thoughts transparent, meaning that no one would need words to communicate. However, after Glass Cage activated, people who went to sleep never woke up again. Sai reveals that she was Glass Cage's first catalyst: this time, Shin intends to use Ren as the catalyst. After exiting the dam, a demolition crane attempts to destroy it. Hearing both Shin's and the masked ghost's voices from the crane — saying, "Any threat to the project must be eliminated." — the player realizes both are manifestations of Glass Cage. After Seto destroys the crane, Sai leads him to the facility where Ren was taken to. Entering the laboratory, Seto and Sai are confronted by Shin, who coldly dismisses Sai's attempts at reasoning with him and is adamant about proceeding with his plans. As they traverse the laboratory, they overhear a voice announcing "Glass Cage Launch Preparations Complete", strengthening their resolve to save Ren. Making it into the room where Ren is being held, Shin tells them of his intention to use Glass Cage to "obliterate corporeal beings". After Seto defeats him, Shin disappears and Seto releases Ren from the device holding her. Their reunion is cut short as Sai tells them that the backup system has "finished copying her psyche to the AI", allowing Glass Cage to proceed. Ren reveals Shin has escaped to the top of the Tokyo Tower and Seto asks Ren to wait at the base of the tower and for Sai to accompany her. On his way up the tower, Seto hears the voices of P.F., Chiyo and Crow wishing him luck. He confronts and defeats Shin a second time, who reveals his motivations: he had secretly used himself as the first test subject of the human empathy expansion project and gained the ability to hear the thoughts of those around him. Despite his initial belief in the project as a way for humans to empathize with one another, all he heard around him was "jealousy and contempt" and he soon grew disillusioned with the world as even his parents turned against him. Believing no person loved him, Shin wants to put an end to humanity. His words meet with a vehement response from Sai, as she tells him that she loves him, having developed those feelings while she was the catalyst and all she ever wanted was to be part of his life. Hearing this, Shin finds peace, tossing the AI mainframe away so Glass Cage can never be reactivated and vanishes together with Sai, hand-in-hand, after thanking Seto. Descending from the tower, Seto finally learns Ren's name and they resolve to look for other survivors together. == Development == Fragile Dreams was developed by the team at Namco Bandai Games. Director and producer Kentarō Kawashima came up with the concept for the game in 2003, before the Wii console was revealed. When the Wii was unveiled, it became the obvious choice as the game's platform as the Wii remote could be used to control the flashlight. Kawashima wrote the main scenario for the title, w