| Literature DB >> 33266776 |
Abstract
Over recent decades several mathematical theories of consciousness have been put forward including Karl Friston's Free Energy Principle and Giulio Tononi's Integrated Information Theory. In this article we further investigate theory based on Expected Float Entropy (EFE) minimisation which has been around since 2012. EFE involves a version of Shannon Entropy parameterised by relationships. It turns out that, for systems with bias due to learning, certain choices for the relationship parameters are isolated since giving much lower EFE values than others and, hence, the system defines relationships. It is proposed that, in the context of all these relationships, a brain state acquires meaning in the form of the relational content of the associated experience. EFE minimisation is itself an association learning process and its effectiveness as such is tested in this article. The theory and results are consistent with the proposition of there being a close connection between association learning processes and the emergence of consciousness. Such a theory may explain how the brain defines the content of consciousness up to relationship isomorphism.Entities:
Keywords: consciousness and relationships; float entropy; structures implied by neural networks; typical data
Year: 2019 PMID: 33266776 PMCID: PMC7514169 DOI: 10.3390/e21010060
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Entropy (Basel) ISSN: 1099-4300 Impact factor: 2.524
Figure 1Digital photograph sampling using nine nodes and a four shade gray scale.
Node states of the typical data element obtained from the sampling in Figure 1.
| Node 1 | Node 2 | Node 3 | Node 4 | Node 5 | Node 6 | Node 7 | Node 8 | Node 9 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.000 | 294.449 | 294.449 | 0.000 | 147.224 | 294.449 | 147.224 | 0.000 | 147.224 |
Example of weighted relation tables.
|
|
|
|
| ⋯ |
| Node 1 | Node 2 | Node 3 | ⋯ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1 |
|
| ⋯ | node 1 | 1 |
|
| ⋯ |
|
|
| 1 |
| ⋯ | node 2 |
| 1 |
| ⋯ |
|
|
|
| 1 | ⋯ | node 3 |
|
| 1 | ⋯ |
| ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋱ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋱ |
Approximate solution for U and R.
|
| 0 | 147.224 | 294.449 | 441.673 | |||||
| 0 | 1 | 0.29688 | 0.04688 | 0.01563 | |||||
| 147.224 | 0.29688 | 1 | 0.42188 | 0.10938 | |||||
| 294.449 | 0.04688 | 0.42188 | 1 | 0.32813 | |||||
| 441.673 | 0.01563 | 0.10938 | 0.32813 | 1 | |||||
|
| node 1 | node 2 | node 3 | node 4 | node 5 | node 6 | node 7 | node 8 | node 9 |
| node 1 | 1 | 0.95313 | 0.73438 | 0.95313 | 0.79688 | 0.60938 | 0.73438 | 0.60938 | 0.60938 |
| node 2 | 0.95313 | 1 | 0.95313 | 0.79688 | 0.95313 | 0.79688 | 0.60938 | 0.73438 | 0.60938 |
| node 3 | 0.73438 | 0.95313 | 1 | 0.60938 | 0.79688 | 0.95313 | 0.60938 | 0.60938 | 0.73438 |
| node 4 | 0.95313 | 0.79688 | 0.60938 | 1 | 0.95313 | 0.73438 | 0.95313 | 0.79688 | 0.60938 |
| node 5 | 0.79688 | 0.95313 | 0.79688 | 0.95313 | 1 | 0.95313 | 0.79688 | 0.95313 | 0.79688 |
| node 6 | 0.60938 | 0.79688 | 0.95313 | 0.73438 | 0.95313 | 1 | 0.60938 | 0.79688 | 0.95313 |
| node 7 | 0.73438 | 0.60938 | 0.60938 | 0.95313 | 0.79688 | 0.60938 | 1 | 0.95313 | 0.73438 |
| node 8 | 0.60938 | 0.73438 | 0.60938 | 0.79688 | 0.95313 | 0.79688 | 0.95313 | 1 | 0.95313 |
| node 9 | 0.60938 | 0.60938 | 0.73438 | 0.60938 | 0.79688 | 0.95313 | 0.73438 | 0.95313 | 1 |
Figure 2Graph illustration of the weighted relations in Table 3, showing strongest relationships (solid lines) and intermediate relationships (dash lines).
Figure 3An -histogram for the training data using 2000 observations and a bin interval of 0.05. The value of the approximate solution is shown (triangular marker).
Figure 4A histogram showing the proportion of the 200 test data elements that have n out of four nodes correctly completed, for , when using minimum float entropy completion (solid line) and when completing each node independently of the others by selecting for each node the most commonly observed state for that node in the training set (light dash line). For further comparison, the binomial distribution B(4,1/4) which gives the probability of correctly completing n out of four nodes when guessing node states uniformly at random for (heavy dash line).
Figure 5A histogram showing the proportion of the elements of the obfuscated version of that have n out of nine nodes correctly completed, when using nftool, for (dotted line). For comparison, the results shown in Figure 4 are included. The results when using minimum float entropy completion are shown (solid line), the results are shown for when completing each node independently of the others by selecting for each node the most commonly observed state for that node in the training set (light dash line), and the distribution for guessing node states uniformly at random is shown (heavy dash line).
Figure 6An -histogram for the test data as sampled using 20,000 observations and a bin interval of 0.025. The value of the approximate solution is shown (triangular marker).
Figure 7An -histogram for the minimum float entropy completed test data using 20,000 observations and a bin interval of 0.025. The value of the approximate solution is shown (triangular marker).
Figure 8An -histogram for the uniform randomly completed test data using 20,000 observations and a bin interval of 0.025. The value of the approximate solution is shown (triangular marker).
Figure 9Eight tuples each containing three of the initial nodes. The geometric layout of the initial node is that of the sampling locations in Figure 1.
Notation (most of the formal definitions can be found in Section 1.1).
| Symbol | Description |
|---|---|
|
| a relationship isomorphism |
|
| elements of |
|
| an element of |
|
| the Binomial distribution. |
|
| conditions, involving weighted relations, in the definition of |
| multi-relational float entropy. | |
|
| a metric on the set of all weighted relations on |
|
| for |
| obtained from the corresponding | |
| vector space. | |
|
| the expected float entropy, relative to |
|
| the mean approximation of |
|
| the float entropy, relative to |
|
| the multi-relational float entropy, relative to |
| of the data element | |
|
| the map |
|
| the Shannon entropy of the system. |
| node 1,node 2,node 3,… | elements of |
|
| the Normal approximation of the Binomial distribution |
|
| the probability distribution |
| by the bias of the given system. | |
|
| an element of |
|
| the element of |
|
| a nonempty finite set; in most places |
|
| a data element for |
| states. | |
|
| the typical data for the given system, i.e., |
| observations of the given system. | |
|
| the map |
| element representation of observation number | |
| injective. | |
|
| an element of |
|
| elements of |
|
| the node repertoire, i.e., the set of node states for a given system. |
|
| a finite test set of numbered observations of the given system. |
|
| the set of numbered minimum float entropy completions of the obfuscated |
| elements of | |
|
| the map |
| element representation of observation number | |
| injective. | |
|
| the set of all reflexive, symmetric weighted-relations on |
|
| the set of all reflexive, symmetric weighted-relations on |
|
| the set of all data elements |
|
| a partition of |
|
| the power set of |