archiTECTONICS: Pre- and Trans-Disciplinary Reference in Beginning Design

This presentation was part of the session : Pedagogy: Procedures, Scaffolds, Strategies, Tactics24th National Conference on the Beginning Design StudentPedagogical approaches to beginning design in architecture often assume trans-disciplinary modes of exploration to filter problem parameters and sculpt perceptual outlook for iterative potential. A closer look suggests moments within the architectural design process that come before, or around, the discipline itself in the form of other disciplines accompanied by basic principles, such as Visual Literacy. Iterating and perceiving through every disciplinary dynamic, instance, and/or action in the process of designing transcends, builds, and structures its neighbor for explorative sequencing, intention, and growth of sensibilities in design resolution. An acute awareness of disciplinary state, in a maturing design process, can alleviate obscurity of ideological foundation and facilitate growth for trans-disciplinary thinking, making, and communicating in a root discipline such as architecture. How can beginning design instructors guide young designers to keep ideas and concepts for design in focus, recognizing that root disciplines transcend pre- and trans-disciplinary processes? Does recognizing variation in pace, induced by digital and analog tools, and intention of design iteration, by discipline, instill clarity by pre-disciplinary thinking, perception, and operation? Trans-disciplinary exercise provokes awareness of pre-disciplinary foundations furthering possibilities for unique root-disciplinary understandings and results. The developed exercise, archiTECTONIC, recognizes and cycles through reasoning, conceptualization, and iteration in a trans-disciplinary sequence, allowing the beginning design student to recognize pre-disciplinary ideology, pace, and purpose when processing ideas through fundamentals of architectural design. Engaging this as a strategy for seeing, thinking, and maneuvering through a dynamic process provides design liberty and clarity for processing and communicating in a root discipline, in this case architecture

Neurally Implementable Semantic Networks

We propose general principles for semantic networks allowing them to be implemented as dynamical neural networks. Major features of our scheme include: (a) the interpretation that each node in a network stands for a bound integration of the meanings of all nodes and external events the node links with; (b) the systematic use of nodes that stand for categories or types, with separate nodes for instances of these types; (c) an implementation of relationships that does not use intrinsically typed links between nodes.Comment: 32 pages, 12 figure

Artificial Intelligence in the Context of Human Consciousness

Artificial intelligence (AI) can be defined as the ability of a machine to learn and make decisions based on acquired information. AI’s development has incited rampant public speculation regarding the singularity theory: a futuristic phase in which intelligent machines are capable of creating increasingly intelligent systems. Its implications, combined with the close relationship between humanity and their machines, make achieving understanding both natural and artificial intelligence imperative. Researchers are continuing to discover natural processes responsible for essential human skills like decision-making, understanding language, and performing multiple processes simultaneously. Artificial intelligence attempts to simulate these functions through techniques like artificial neural networks, Markov Decision Processes, Human Language Technology, and Multi-Agent Systems, which rely upon a combination of mathematical models and hardware

Creativity and Culture in Copyright Theory

Creativity is universally agreed to be a good that copyright law should seek to promote, yet copyright scholarship and policymaking have proceeded largely on the basis of assumptions about what it actually is. When asked to discuss the source of their inspiration, individual artists describe a process that is intrinsically ineffable. Rights theorists of all varieties have generally subscribed to this understanding, describing creativity in terms of an individual liberty whose form remains largely unspecified. Economic theorists of copyright work from the opposite end of the creative process, seeking to divine the optimal rules for promoting creativity by measuring its marketable byproducts. But these theorists offer no particular reason to think that marketable byproducts are either an appropriate proxy or an effective stimulus for creativity (as opposed to production), and more typically refuse to engage the question. The upshot is that the more we talk about creativity, the more it disappears from view. At the same time, the mainstream of intellectual property scholarship has persistently overlooked a broad array of social science methodologies that provide both descriptive tools for constructing ethnographies of creative processes and theoretical tools for modeling them