Studying the "Study of Consciousness" (Stanislas Duanne) can further deepen your understanding of coaching theory.
I am studying to add a unique flavour to "unconscious rewriting".
This series of blog posts are my study notes. This time, the theme that follows the unconscious and conscious
I will write a "sign of consciousness".
Humans unconsciously store external stimuli, mainly grasped by modal channels such as eyes and ears, in the brain as information.
From that information, think about what you think is essential.
Using language, we think deep, and we can also convey and accept that information to others.
I've seen this consciousness feature in this blog.
Furthermore, it has become possible to understand the functions of the cortical structure and the molecular basis of neurons, etc., to exert the function of consciousness through experiments.
We have learned a lot about the routes of information transmission.
Now that I know what's happening in my brain
I want to look at the question, "Can a computer simulate consciousness?"
Stanislas Duanne "believes that there is no logical problem with that possibility but also sees it as one of the exciting paths that future scientific research will follow. ".
Computer science may be able to solve this problem in the future.
The science of consciousness is constantly advancing, and in the future, we should be able to "simulate consciousness with a computer."
Duanne has already succeeded in simulating conscious access on a computer.
Those studies should help build a new software foundation.
This new software will consist of many programs, each dedicated to one function, such as face recognition, motion detection, spatial navigation, vocalization, and motion. Modern computers also run many programs at the same time.
Some of these programs enter information from the inside. Rather than outside it, the system provides some introspection or self-knowledge. For example, a program specializing in error detection learns to predict whether an organization deviates from its immediate goals.
As a first step in solving "Can a computer simulate consciousness?", It is necessary to communicate with each other flexibly.
The focus of interest for the entire organization, which corresponds to the mind, is as follows:
The output of one program is selected, and this selected information goes into a workspace that works serially. It can send information back to any other program at once.
Each application runs in an individually allocated memory space on current computers, and output information is not shared between apps.
A common means of exchanging unique expertise between programs is that there are no rudimentary techniques that require user intervention, except for the clipboard.
Duanne states that having an autonomous clipboard-like function, which is the global workspace in the brain, dramatically improves the flexibility of information exchange.
As we've seen in this blog, the answer is how to bring a global workspace to your computer.
Next, we need a learning algorithm that accurately processes the information in the clipboard.
Individual programs are not fixed and must have the ability to discover how best to use the information they receive.
And like the brain, it regulates itself according to learning rules that find various predictable relationships hidden between input information.
In this way, the system adapts to the peculiarities of its structure. Such as being immune to the adverse effects of the environment. And subprogram errors and enhances its stability.
Computers of the future will be able to screen data that deserves conscious, slow scrutiny in the global workspace, according to their values, without user intervention.
Randomly selected "thinking" from voluntary action constantly rises into the workspace, where they make choices based on the degree of fitness with the system's primary goals.
It may be too far ahead, but Duanne's "simulating consciousness with a computer" leads to research on artificial intelligence.
Here's why I've been blogging about Duanne's work.
I started to absorb the latest knowledge about the brain from cognitive science coaching.
However, I thought that the explanation that "this is what my heart is, so I should do it" was not enough for a coach.
I thought it necessary to study the relationship between brain science and artificial intelligence research (= cognitive science). Moreover, I want to learn about philosophy and psychology in parallel.
When explaining KAIZEN, I construct the basic idea and the meaning of the concrete KAIZEN process in my brain.
What is the unconscious? I seemed to know it when I started this blog, but I didn't know anything.
We can learn how to use the unconscious by coaching. But I didn't even understand the relationship between the unconscious and the conscious.
By studying Duanne's "Consciousness and Brain: How Thoughts are Coded", I understood the functions of the unconscious and conscious.
I learned about the research of brain science, which is the basis of cognitive science. In addition, the essence of Dr Tomabechi and Lou Tice were connected in my brain.
I can confidently explain to you what I have learned.
An excerpt of the description of artificial intelligence from Dr Tomabechi's book "Invitation to Cognitive Science".
Cognitive science is a discipline that studies the work of the mind and brain, thinking that it can be expressed as a function. It has a high affinity with computers because it can be written as a function.
For artificial intelligence to grow, the frame problem needs to be solved. That is the difference between human intelligence and artificial intelligence.
"Frame theory" means "a unit of knowledge for expressing a certain knowledge and its connection method".
To make artificial intelligence understand (infer) some knowledge, a methodology that combines some knowledge (elements) related to that knowledge to form a "frame" and understands the knowledge while conforming to that frame.
We can only understand the task of collecting irrelevant things and finding relevance by climbing the steps of abstraction. But unfortunately, the task of climbing this level of abstraction seems to be something that only humans can do so far.
They said that the limits of cognitive science are right here. Believing that machines can do what only humans can do, they have avoided the essential "frame problem".
In the last line, I introduced a sentence stating "the limits of cognitive science", but I understand that "there is a clear problem of solving the frame problem".
Furthermore, it can be read that the statement that "humans can only do the work of climbing the stairs of abstraction at the moment" expresses the current level of achievement.
Even in Kaizen, by increasing the level of abstraction, you can successfully incorporate the construction examples of others into yourself. That's why I always come up with good ideas.
They said that sound wisdom would come out in case of trouble. But it has come to the point where cognitive science can explain it.
I learned the following in "Consciousness, and Brain-How Thoughts are Coded".
Neural networks have little awareness of what role each unit plays.
The human brain performs coded information processing by gathering and reacting to each unit.
Each nerve cell in the brain does not have a heart, but many of them gather and act to create a heart.