What Is Nature-Like Computation? A Behavioural Approach and a Notion of Programmability
- 207 Downloads
The aim of this paper is to propose an alternative behavioural definition of computation (and of a computer) based simply on whether a system is capable of reacting to the environment—the input—as reflected in a measure of programmability. This definition is intended to have relevance beyond the realm of digital computers, particularly vis-à-vis natural systems. This will be done by using an extension of a phase transition coefficient previously defined in an attempt to characterise the dynamical behaviour of cellular automata and other systems. The transition coefficient measures the sensitivity of a system to external stimuli and will be used to define the susceptibility of a system to be (efficiently) programmed.
KeywordsNatural computation Programmability Compressibility Philosophy of computation Turing universality Cellular automata
I am indebted to the generous reviewers whose comments have helped improve the presentation of this article. I also wish to thank the FQXi for the mini-grant awarded by way of the Silicon Valley Foundation under the title “Time and Computation”, in connection to behaviour as studied in this project (mini-grant no. 2011-93849 (4661)).
- Ausländer, S., Ausländer, D., Müller, M., Wieland, M., Fussenegger, M. (2012). Programmable single-cell mammalian biocomputers. Nature, 487(7405), 123-127.Google Scholar
- Berlekamp, E., Conway, K., Guy, R. (1982). Winning ways for your mathematical plays (Vol. 2). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
- Blanco, J. (2011). Interdisciplinary workshop with Javier Blanco: Ontological, epistemological and methodological aspects of computer science. Germany: University of Stuttgart.Google Scholar
- Cook, M. (2004). Universality in elementary cellular automata. Complex Systems, 15, 1–40.Google Scholar
- Copeland, J. (1996). What is computation? Synthese, 108, 224–359.Google Scholar
- Davis, M. (2011). Universality is ubiquitous, invited lecture. History and philosophy of computing (HAPOC11), Ghent, 8 November.Google Scholar
- Deutsch, D. (1998). The fabric of reality: The science of parallel universes and its implications. Baltimore: Penguin.Google Scholar
- Feynman, R. (1994). The character of physical law. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
- Fodor, J. (2000). The mind doesn’t work that way: The scope and limits of computational psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Fredkin, E. (1992). Finite nature. In Proceedings of the XXVIIth Rencotre de Moriond.Google Scholar
- Kolmogorov, A.N. (1965). Three approaches to the quantitative definition of information. Problems of Information and Transmission, 1(1), 1–7.Google Scholar
- Kudlek, M., & Rogozhin, Y. (2002). A universal Turing machine with 3 states and 9 symbols. In W. Kuich, G. Rozenberg, A. Salomaa (Eds.), Developments in language theory (DLT) 2001. LNCS (Vol. 2295, pp. 311–318).Google Scholar
- Lloyd, S. (2002). Computational capacity of the universe. Physical Review Letters, 237901, 88.Google Scholar
- Lloyd, S. (2006). Programming the universe: a quantum computer scientist takes on the cosmos. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
- Margenstern, M. (2010). Turing machines with two letters and two states. Complex Systems, 19(1).Google Scholar
- Margolus, N. (1984). Physics-like models of computation. Physica, 10D, 81–95.Google Scholar
- Martinez, G.J., Seck-Touh-Mora, J.C., Zenil, H. (2012). Computation and universality: class IV versus class III cellular automata. Journal of Cellular Automata (in press).Google Scholar
- Minsky, M.A. (1960). 6-symbol 7-state universal, Turing machines. Technical Report 54-G-027, MIT.Google Scholar
- Neary, T., & Woods, D. (2009). Four small universal Turing machines. Fundamenta Informaticae, 91(1), 123–144.Google Scholar
- Putnam, H. (1988). Representation and reality. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Scott, D.S. (1970). Outline of a mathematical theory of computation. England: Technical Monograph PRG-2, Oxford University Computing Laboratory.Google Scholar
- Sieg, W. (2012). Step by recursive step: Church’s analysis of effective calculability (with a postscript). In H. Zenil (Ed.), A computable universe, understanding computation & exploring nature as computation. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
- Smith, A. (2012). The Wolfram 2,3 Turing machine research prize. http://www.wolframscience.com/prizes/tm23/solved.html. Accessed 10 April 2012.
- Smith, B.C. (1996). On the origins of objects. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Smith, B.C. (2002). The foundations of computing. http://www.ageofsignificance.org/people/bcsmith/print/smith-foundtns.pdf. Accessed 18 August 2012.
- Smith, B.C. (2010). Age of significance. http://www.ageofsignificance.org/. Accessed 18 August 2012.
- Watanabe, S. (1972). 4-Symbol 5-state universal Turing machine. Information Processing Society of Japan Magazine, 13(9), 588–592.Google Scholar
- Wheeler, J.A. (1990). Information, physics, quantum: the search for links. In W. Zurek (Ed.), Complexity entropy, and the physics of information. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- Wolfram, S. (2002). A new kind of science. Champaign, IL: Wolfram Media.Google Scholar
- Zenil, H. (2010). Compression-based investigation of the behaviour of cellular automata and other systems. Complex Systems, 19(2).Google Scholar
- Zenil, H. (2012a). On the dynamic qualitative behaviour of universal computation. Complex Systems, 20(3), 265–278.Google Scholar
- Zenil, H. (2012b). A Turing test-inspired approach to computation, Turing in context II. Brussels (forthcoming).Google Scholar
- Zenil, H. (2012c). Nature-like computation and programmability. In G. Dodig-Crnkovic, & R. Giovagnoli (Eds.), A behavioural foundation for natural computing and a programmability test. Heidelberg: Springer (in press).Google Scholar
- Zenil, H. (2012d). Programmability for natural computation and the game of life as a case study. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence (in press).Google Scholar