Advertisement

Information, Knowledge, Representation

  • Michael K. BergmanEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Gregory Bateson defined information as the “difference that makes a difference.” Claude Shannon, the founder of information theory, emphasized the engineering aspect of information, defining it as a message or sequence of messages communicated over a channel; he specifically excluded meaning. C.S. Peirce emphasized meaning and related it to the triadic relationship between immediate object, representation, and interpretation. Depending on the context, information embraces all of these interpretations. Information also has a physical aspect, reflected through its structure. Peirce’s triad forms a sign and is the basis for the process of sign-making and understanding that he called semiosis. Three kinds of sign are indispensable in reasoning. The first is the diagrammatic icon, exhibiting similarity or analogy. The second is the index, like a pronoun or relative that forces attention to a particular object. The third is the symbolic name or description that signifies its object by means of an association of ideas or habitual connection. We associate knowledge and its discovery with terms such as open, dynamic, belief, judgment, interpretation, logic, coherence, context, reality, and truth. Peirce’s pragmatic view is that knowledge is fallible information that we believe sufficiently to act upon. I argue in this book that knowledge representation is a complete triadic sign, with the meaning of the information conveyed by its symbolic representation and context, as understood and acted upon by the interpreting agent. A challenge of knowledge representation is to find structured representations of information—including meaning—that can be simply expressed and efficiently conveyed.

Keywords

Information Knowledge Knowledge representation Semiosis 

References

  1. 1.
    T.W. Deacon, The Symbolic Species: The Co-Evolution of Language and the Brain (W.W. Norton, New York, 1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    G. Bateson, Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1972)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C.E. Shannon, A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27, 379–423 (1948)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. Landauer, Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process. IBM J. Res. Dev. 5, 183–191 (1961)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Landauer, Information is physical. Phys. Today 44(5), 23–29 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Bérut, A. Arakelyan, A. Petrosyan, S. Ciliberto, R. Dillenschneider, E. Lutz, Experimental verification of Landauer’s principle linking information and thermodynamics. Nature 483, 187–189 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Karnani, K. Paakkonen, A. Annila, The physical character of information. Proc. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 465, 2155–2175 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    C.E. Shannon, W. Weaver, The Mathematical Theory of Communication (University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL, 1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    R.M. Losee, Information from Processes: About the Nature of Information Creation, Use, and Representation (Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Furner, in Information Cultures in the Digital Age, ed. by M. Kelly, J. Bielby. ‘Data’: The data (Springer, Wiesbaden, 2016), pp. 287–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    T.D. Schneider, Information is Not Entropy, Information is Not Uncertainty! Molecular Information Theory and the Theory of Molecular Machines. https://schneider.ncifcrf.gov/information.is.not.uncertainty.html
  12. 12.
    J. Koelman, What Is Entropy? Science 2.0. http://www.science20.com/hammock_physicist/what_entropy-89730
  13. 13.
    E.T. Jaynes, Information theory and statistical mechanics. Phys. Rev. 106, 620–630 (1957)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    B. Zimmer, The surprising origins of life’s complexity. Quanta Magazine. https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-surprising-origins-of-lifes-complexity-20130716/
  15. 15.
    S. Sarkar, J.L. England, Sufficient physical conditions for self-replication. arXiv:1709.09191 [cond-mat, physics:physics] (September 2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    E. Schrödinger, What Is Life?: The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell (University Press, Trinity College, Dublin, 1944)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    L. Brillouin, The Negentropy principle of information. J. Appl. Phys. 24, 1152–1163 (1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    I. Prigogine, G. Nicolis, Biological order, structure and instabilities. Q. Rev. Biophys. 2–4, 107–148 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. Annila, S. Salthe, Physical foundations of evolutionary theory. J. Non-Equilib. Thermodyn. 35, 301–321 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    G.E. Crooks, The entropy production fluctuation theorem and the nonequilibrium work relation for free energy differences. Phys. Rev. E 60, 2721–2726 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    J.L. England, Dissipative adaptation in driven self-assembly. Nat. Nanotechnol. 10, 919–923 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    S.N. Salthe, Naturalizing information. Inf. Dent. 2, 417–425 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    J.L. England, Statistical physics of self-replication. J. Chem. Phys. 139, 121923 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    A.D. Wissner-Gross, C.E. Freer, Causal entropic forces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 168702 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    J.J. Eaton, D. Bawden, What kind of resource is information? Int. J. Inf. Manag. 11, 156–165 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    M.J. Bates, Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science. Inf. Res. Int. Electron. J. 10, n4 (2005)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    A. Bejan, S. Lorente, The constructal law and the evolution of design in nature. Phys. Life Rev. 8, 209–240 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    J. Warner, Human Information Retrieval (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2010)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    K. Kelley, What Technology Wants (Viking/Penguin, New York, 2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    J. Mokyr, The Gifts of Athena: Historical Origins of the Knowledge Economy (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2002)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    S. Wolfram, A New Kind of Science (Wolfram Media, Champaign, IL, 2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    C.S. Peirce, L.V. Welby, Semiotic and Significs: The Correspondence Between Charles S. Peirce and Lady Victoria Welby (Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1977)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    R.W. Burch, Peirce’s 10, 28, and 66 sign-types: The simplest mathematics. Sem. Ther. 2011 (2011)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    C.S. Peirce, The fixation of belief. Pop. Sci. Monthly 12, 1–15 (1877)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    T. Hobbes, Elements of Law, Natural and Political (Routledge, Abingdon, 2013)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    C.S. Peirce, What is in a Sign? (Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, 1894)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    R. Davis, H. Shrobe, P. Szolovits, What is a knowledge representation? AI Mag. 14, 17 (1993)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Y. Zhou, A set theoretic approach for knowledge representation: The representation part. arXiv, vol. 1603 (March 2016)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    C.S. Peirce, On a new list of categories. Proc. Am. Acad. Arts Sci. VII, 287–298 (1867)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    J.F. Sowa, Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational Foundations (Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove, 2000)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    C.S. Peirce, The Peirce Edition Project, Nomenclature and divisions of triadic relations, as far as they are determined, The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings, Volume 2 (1893–1913) (Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, 1998), pp. 289–299.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Borges P. A visual model of Peirce’s 66 classes of signs unravels his late proposal of enlarging semiotic theory. In Model-Based Reasoning in Science and Technology 2010 (pp. 221–237). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    P. Farias, J. Queiroz, On diagrams for Peirce’s 10, 28, and 66 classes of signs. Sem. Ther. 147, 165–184 (2003)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    T. Jappy, Peirce’s Twenty-Eight Classes of Signs and the Philosophy of Representation: Rhetoric, Interpretation and Hexadic Semiosis (Bloomsbury Academic, London, 2017)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    C.S. Peirce, The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings, Vol 1 (1867–1893) (Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1992)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    S. Ika, A Critical Examination of the Philosophy of Charles S. Peirce: A Defence of the Claim that his Pragmatism is Founded on his Theory of Categories. Ph.D., University of Notre Dame Australia (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cognonto CorporationCoralvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations