Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (3)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = conscious Turing machine

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
17 pages, 3452 KiB  
Article
A Categorical Model of General Consciousness
by Yinsheng Zhang
Biomimetics 2025, 10(4), 241; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics10040241 - 14 Apr 2025
Viewed by 1039
Abstract
Consciousness is liable to not be defined in scientific research, because it is an object of study in philosophy too, which actually hinders the integration of research on a large scale. The present study attempts to define consciousness with mathematical approaches by including [...] Read more.
Consciousness is liable to not be defined in scientific research, because it is an object of study in philosophy too, which actually hinders the integration of research on a large scale. The present study attempts to define consciousness with mathematical approaches by including the common meaning of consciousness across multiple disciplines. By extracting the essential characteristics of consciousness—transitivity—a categorical model of consciousness is established. This model is used to obtain three layers of categories, namely objects, materials as reflex units, and consciousness per se in homomorphism. The model forms a framework that functional neurons or AI (biomimetic) parts can be treated as variables, functions or local solutions of the model. Consequently, consciousness is quantified algebraically, which helps determining and evaluating consciousness with views that integrate nature and artifacts. Current consciousness theories and computation theories are analyzed to support the model. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Exploration of Bio-Inspired Computing)
Show Figures

Figure 1

8 pages, 211 KiB  
Article
From Turing to Conscious Machines
by Igor Aleksander
Philosophies 2022, 7(3), 57; https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies7030057 - 29 May 2022
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 3687
Abstract
In the period between Turing’s 1950 “Computing Machinery and Intelligence” and the current considerable public exposure to the term “artificial intelligence (AI)”, Turing’s question “Can a machine think?” has become a topic of daily debate in the media, the home, and, indeed, the [...] Read more.
In the period between Turing’s 1950 “Computing Machinery and Intelligence” and the current considerable public exposure to the term “artificial intelligence (AI)”, Turing’s question “Can a machine think?” has become a topic of daily debate in the media, the home, and, indeed, the pub. However, “Can a machine think?” is sliding towards a more controversial issue: “Can a machine be conscious?” Of course, the two issues are linked. It is held here that consciousness is a pre-requisite to thought. In Turing’s imitation game, a conscious human player is replaced by a machine, which, in the first place, is assumed not to be conscious, and which may fool an interlocutor, as consciousness cannot be perceived from an individual’s speech or action. Here, the developing paradigm of machine consciousness is examined and combined with an extant analysis of living consciousness to argue that a conscious machine is feasible, and capable of thinking. The route to this utilizes learning in a “neural state machine”, which brings into play Turing’s view of neural “unorganized” machines. The conclusion is that a machine of the “unorganized” kind could have an artificial form of consciousness that resembles the natural form and that throws some light on its nature. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Turing the Philosopher: Established Debates and New Developments)
73 pages, 2970 KiB  
Article
Design and Construction of a Brain-Like Computer: A New Class of Frequency-Fractal Computing Using Wireless Communication in a Supramolecular Organic, Inorganic System
by Subrata Ghosh, Krishna Aswani, Surabhi Singh, Satyajit Sahu, Daisuke Fujita and Anirban Bandyopadhyay
Information 2014, 5(1), 28-100; https://doi.org/10.3390/info5010028 - 27 Jan 2014
Cited by 36 | Viewed by 33324
Abstract
Here, we introduce a new class of computer which does not use any circuit or logic gate. In fact, no program needs to be written: it learns by itself and writes its own program to solve a problem. Gödel’s incompleteness argument is explored [...] Read more.
Here, we introduce a new class of computer which does not use any circuit or logic gate. In fact, no program needs to be written: it learns by itself and writes its own program to solve a problem. Gödel’s incompleteness argument is explored here to devise an engine where an astronomically large number of “if-then” arguments are allowed to grow by self-assembly, based on the basic set of arguments written in the system, thus, we explore the beyond Turing path of computing but following a fundamentally different route adopted in the last half-a-century old non-Turing adventures. Our hardware is a multilayered seed structure. If we open the largest seed, which is the final hardware, we find several computing seed structures inside, if we take any of them and open, there are several computing seeds inside. We design and synthesize the smallest seed, the entire multilayered architecture grows by itself. The electromagnetic resonance band of each seed looks similar, but the seeds of any layer shares a common region in its resonance band with inner and upper layer, hence a chain of resonance bands is formed (frequency fractal) connecting the smallest to the largest seed (hence the name invincible rhythm or Ajeya Chhandam in Sanskrit). The computer solves intractable pattern search (Clique) problem without searching, since the right pattern written in it spontaneously replies back to the questioner. To learn, the hardware filters any kind of sensory input image into several layers of images, each containing basic geometric polygons (fractal decomposition), and builds a network among all layers, multi-sensory images are connected in all possible ways to generate “if” and “then” argument. Several such arguments and decisions (phase transition from “if” to “then”) self-assemble and form the two giant columns of arguments and rules of phase transition. Any input question is converted into a pattern as noted above, and these two astronomically large columns project a solution. The driving principle of computing is synchronization and de-synchronization of network paths, the system drives towards highest density of coupled arguments for maximum matching. Memory is located at all layers of the hardware. Learning, computing occurs everywhere simultaneously. Since resonance chain connects all computing seeds, wireless processing is feasible without a screening effect. The computing power is increased by maximizing the density of resonance states and bandwidth of the resonance chain together. We discovered this remarkable computing while studying the human brain, so we present a new model of the human brain in terms of an experimentally determined resonance chain with bandwidth 10−15 Hz (complete brain with all sensors) to 10+15 Hz (DNA) along with its implementation using a pure organic synthesis of entire computer (brain jelly) in our lab, software prototype as proof of concept and finally a new fourth circuit element (Hinductor) based beyond Complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS) hardware is also presented. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Information Processes)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Back to TopTop