Computable Learning, Neural Networks and Institutions

  • Francesco Luna
Part of the Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing book series (STUDFUZZ, volume 100)


After showing the positive role that an institution can play in the learning process, we motivate the intuition for why-in the context of a major change in the environment-the more rigid and strictly specialized an institution is, the longer and more complex the learning process will be of any actor subject to the by-now obsolete institution. In particular, the inductive adaptation of economic actors (firms in our setting) to a new environment (such as the one caused by transition to a market economy) is slowed by the very existence of some institution or organizational setting that had emerged in the original environment as a superior tool of induction.


Hide Layer Training Session Boolean Function Social Learning Productive Configuration 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Birner J. (1995) Models of Mind and Society: the Place of Cognitive Psychology in the Economics, Methodology and Social Philosophy of F.A. Hayek. University of Trento, mimeoGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fitoussi J. P., Velupillai K. (1993) Macroeconomic Perspectives. In: Barkai F., Fischer S., Liviatan N. (Eds.) Monetary Theory and Thought. Mc Millan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gallant S. I. (1993) Neural Networks Learning and Expert Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gold M.E. (1965) Limiting Recursion. The Journal of Symbolic Logic 30(1), 28–48MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gold M. E. (1967) Language Identification in the Limit. Information and Control 10, 447–474MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Luna F. (1993) Learning in a Computable Setting. UCLA, mimeoGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Luna F. (1997) Learning in a Computable Setting: Applications of Gold’s Inductive Model. In: H. Amman et al. (Eds.) Computational Approaches to Economic Problems. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic PublishersGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Luna F. (2000) The Emergence of a Firm as a Complex-Problem Solver. Taiwan Journal of Political Economy, forthcomingGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Minsky M., Papert S. (1969) Perceptrons: An Introduction to Computational Geometry. MIT Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nelson R. R. (1994) Economic Growth via the Coevolution of Technology and Institutions. In: Leydesdorff L., Van den Besselaar P. (Eds.) Evolutionary Economics and Chaos Theory. Pinter Publishers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rustem B., Velupillai K. (1990) Rationality, Computability, and Control. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 14, 419–432MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Simon H. A. (1978), Rationality as Process and as Product of Thought. American Economic Association Papers and Proceedings 68, 2, 1–16Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Spear S. E. (1989) Learning Rational Expectations Under Computability Constraints. Econometrica 57(4), 889–910MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Velupillai K. (2000) Computable Economics: The Fourth Arne Ryde Lectures. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zambelli S. (1994) Computability and Economic Applications. The Research Program Computable Economics. Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of Aalborg, DenmarkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francesco Luna
    • 1
  1. 1.International Monetary FundUSA

Personalised recommendations