1,826,070 research outputs found

    Proceedings of the ECCS 2005 satellite workshop: embracing complexity in design - Paris 17 November 2005

    Get PDF
    Embracing complexity in design is one of the critical issues and challenges of the 21st century. As the realization grows that design activities and artefacts display properties associated with complex adaptive systems, so grows the need to use complexity concepts and methods to understand these properties and inform the design of better artifacts. It is a great challenge because complexity science represents an epistemological and methodological swift that promises a holistic approach in the understanding and operational support of design. But design is also a major contributor in complexity research. Design science is concerned with problems that are fundamental in the sciences in general and complexity sciences in particular. For instance, design has been perceived and studied as a ubiquitous activity inherent in every human activity, as the art of generating hypotheses, as a type of experiment, or as a creative co-evolutionary process. Design science and its established approaches and practices can be a great source for advancement and innovation in complexity science. These proceedings are the result of a workshop organized as part of the activities of a UK government AHRB/EPSRC funded research cluster called Embracing Complexity in Design (www.complexityanddesign.net) and the European Conference in Complex Systems (complexsystems.lri.fr). Embracing complexity in design is one of the critical issues and challenges of the 21st century. As the realization grows that design activities and artefacts display properties associated with complex adaptive systems, so grows the need to use complexity concepts and methods to understand these properties and inform the design of better artifacts. It is a great challenge because complexity science represents an epistemological and methodological swift that promises a holistic approach in the understanding and operational support of design. But design is also a major contributor in complexity research. Design science is concerned with problems that are fundamental in the sciences in general and complexity sciences in particular. For instance, design has been perceived and studied as a ubiquitous activity inherent in every human activity, as the art of generating hypotheses, as a type of experiment, or as a creative co-evolutionary process. Design science and its established approaches and practices can be a great source for advancement and innovation in complexity science. These proceedings are the result of a workshop organized as part of the activities of a UK government AHRB/EPSRC funded research cluster called Embracing Complexity in Design (www.complexityanddesign.net) and the European Conference in Complex Systems (complexsystems.lri.fr)

    Principles and symmetries of complexity in quantum field theory

    Full text link
    Based on general and minimal properties of the {\it discrete} circuit complexity, we define the complexity in {\it continuous} systems in a geometrical way. We first show that the Finsler metric naturally emerges in the geometry of the complexity in continuous systems. Due to fundamental symmetries of quantum field theories, the Finsler metric is more constrained and consequently, the complexity of SU(nn) operators is uniquely determined as a length of a geodesic in the Finsler geometry. Our Finsler metric is bi-invariant contrary to the right-invariance of discrete qubit systems. We clarify why the bi-invariance is relevant in quantum field theoretic systems. After comparing our results with discrete qubit systems we show most results in kk-local right-invariant metric can also appear in our framework. Based on the bi-invariance of our formalism, we propose a new interpretation for the Schr\"{o}dinger's equation in isolated systems - the quantum state evolves by the process of minimizing "computational cost."Comment: Published version; added a short introduction on Finsler geometr

    Primordial Evolution in the Finitary Process Soup

    Full text link
    A general and basic model of primordial evolution--a soup of reacting finitary and discrete processes--is employed to identify and analyze fundamental mechanisms that generate and maintain complex structures in prebiotic systems. The processes--Ï”\epsilon-machines as defined in computational mechanics--and their interaction networks both provide well defined notions of structure. This enables us to quantitatively demonstrate hierarchical self-organization in the soup in terms of complexity. We found that replicating processes evolve the strategy of successively building higher levels of organization by autocatalysis. Moreover, this is facilitated by local components that have low structural complexity, but high generality. In effect, the finitary process soup spontaneously evolves a selection pressure that favors such components. In light of the finitary process soup's generality, these results suggest a fundamental law of hierarchical systems: global complexity requires local simplicity.Comment: 7 pages, 10 figures; http://cse.ucdavis.edu/~cmg/compmech/pubs/pefps.ht

    Viewpoint Development of Stochastic Hybrid Systems

    Get PDF
    Nowadays, due to the explosive spreading of networked and highly distributed systems, mastering system complexity becomes a critical issue. Two development and verification paradigms have become more popular: viewpoints and randomisation. The viewpoints offer large freedom and introduce concurrency and compositionality in the development process. Randomisation is now a traditional method for reducing complexity (comparing with deterministic models) and it offers finer analytical analysis tools (quantification over non-determinism, multi-valued logics, etc). In this paper, we propose a combination of these two paradigms introducing a viewpoint methodology for systems with stochastic behaviours

    Quantum Proofs

    Get PDF
    Quantum information and computation provide a fascinating twist on the notion of proofs in computational complexity theory. For instance, one may consider a quantum computational analogue of the complexity class \class{NP}, known as QMA, in which a quantum state plays the role of a proof (also called a certificate or witness), and is checked by a polynomial-time quantum computation. For some problems, the fact that a quantum proof state could be a superposition over exponentially many classical states appears to offer computational advantages over classical proof strings. In the interactive proof system setting, one may consider a verifier and one or more provers that exchange and process quantum information rather than classical information during an interaction for a given input string, giving rise to quantum complexity classes such as QIP, QSZK, and QMIP* that represent natural quantum analogues of IP, SZK, and MIP. While quantum interactive proof systems inherit some properties from their classical counterparts, they also possess distinct and uniquely quantum features that lead to an interesting landscape of complexity classes based on variants of this model. In this survey we provide an overview of many of the known results concerning quantum proofs, computational models based on this concept, and properties of the complexity classes they define. In particular, we discuss non-interactive proofs and the complexity class QMA, single-prover quantum interactive proof systems and the complexity class QIP, statistical zero-knowledge quantum interactive proof systems and the complexity class \class{QSZK}, and multiprover interactive proof systems and the complexity classes QMIP, QMIP*, and MIP*.Comment: Survey published by NOW publisher
    • 

    corecore