309 Matching Annotations
  1. Oct 2023
    1. @jarrodcarter1466 1 year ago I agree with everything you said Chris: Additionally, the recipe to build baritone range for me has been: 1) stretch and strengthen your falsetto as high as you can every day 2) stretch your falsetto down to well under the passagio with descending scales over your chest voice to help your transition to mixed voice become smooth and eliminate ascending blockages 3) do the Messa di Voce exercise as often as you can. It teaches you placement and to thread the power of your chest voice through your falsetto 4) understand that your voice should get weaker over the course of a session as the muscles fatigue. It should never get sore 5) sing lots of high songs exclusively in falsetto to strengthen the often neglected head voice muscles 6) avoid singing songs that reinforce bad technique. You should never reach a high note that you can't strain up from. Your voice should get thinner and weaker as it ascends and not hit blockages. Songs that give you a strained high-note ceiling should be avoided.

      Some handy tips someone has on how they increased their head voice range as a baritone.

  2. Sep 2023
    1. Your Evening Routine Is Broken Your day’s fate is sealed long before the alarm sounds. To ensure a productive, positive tomorrow, get started tonight by following these 10 nighttime schedule rules. By Kathleen Nadeau, Ph.D. Verified Updated on January 25, 2021

      An very brief article from [[ADDitude Magazine]] with some helpful bulleted lists of things covering the following

      • Devise a Smart Bedtime Routine
      • Morning Routine at Home
      • Morning Routine at Work
      • How to Build a Routine

      Some of these tips deserve to be made into [[Anki]] cards later.

  3. Aug 2023
    1. Mind Like a Sky

      A very useful [[meditation]] by [[Lidia Zylowska]] that asks the listener to focus on their thoughts. Seems similar to [[Mahamudra chopping]] (a la [[Loch Kelly]]). Possibly needs to be adapted for those with [[aphantasia]] or [[people who don't have inner speech]].

    2. Mindfulness Prescription for Adult ADHD - Exercises

      A meditation course by [[Lidia Zylowska]] mentioned during the [[ADDA Mindfulness Meditation]] session [[2023-08-05 VPSG; Mindfulness Meditation for the ADHD Brain]]. Purported to be developed to specifically target [[ADHD]].

    1. opinionMost of us have an inner voice, but if you're part of the minority who doesn't, this could be whyBy Bradley N JackPosted Thu 6 Feb 2020 at 12:00pm

      A brief article that gives some speculations on why there are some [[people who don't have inner speech]].

    1. Difference Between Journal and Ledger Last updated on July 26, 2018 by Surbhi S

      A good article distinguishing between an [[accounting journal]] and an [[accounting ledger]] as it applies to the domain of [[finance]]. I learned about this while reading the wiki article on [[distributed ledger technology]]. It was cited as a source for the passage

      In some cases, where the distributed digital information functions as an accounting journal rather than an accounting ledger, another term is used: RJT for replicated journal technology.[5]

    1. A good article on how [[Coursera]] moved from [[REST]] [[API]]s to a [[GraphQL]] API an the troubles they encountered along the way.

  4. Jul 2023
    1. An interesting website that offers a VVIQ test for people's capacity to visualize things in "the mind's eye". May be helpful for people who have [[aphantasia]].

    1. What does the science say?In scientific studies, it seems people experience more of a mix than the self-selected responders to a viral post that implied it was either/or.A small study in 2011 tried to get a better picture of how people think. They gave beepers to a random sample of students. When the beeper went off, they had to note down what was going on inside their heads moments before it went off. This went on for several weeks, to get them used to it and then to get an accurate picture of what was happening inside their minds."Subjects experienced themselves as inwardly talking to themselves in 26 percent of all samples," the team wrote in Psychology Today. "But there were large individual differences: some subjects never experienced inner speech; other subjects experienced inner speech in as many as 75 percent of their samples. The median percentage across subjects was 20 percent.Advertisement"Some people talk to themselves a lot, some never, some occasionally."

      After learning about [[aphantasia]] (people who can't visualize things in their mind's eye), I wanted to know more about people without an inner monologue.

    1. [[Commons Engine]] was mentioned by [[Mary Camacho]] as an org that [[Arthur Brock]] works with. She brought it up during [[Holo AMA No. 39 - HoloFuel Special Pt 1 with Mary Camacho & David Atkinson]] here.

      Camacho said that Commons Engine put together (along with [[MetaCurrency]]) workshops on how to design currencies & focus on how to design [[mutual credit currencies]].

      Camacho spoke highly of them.

    1. Popper was aware that he would be accused of hypostatising abstractions in asserting the reality and objectivity of world 3 objects. In response, he indicates strongly that he has no interest in what he regards as pointless terminological disputes over the meaning of the term “world” or “real”. He is therefore content, if required, to express his account of objective knowledge in more familiar and perhaps more mundane terms: world 3 objects are abstract objects while their physical embodiments are concrete objects. But that should not be allowed to disguise the fact that he saw the relationships between the three categories of his ontology as of enormous importance in understanding the role of science as an element of culture: my thesis is that our world 3 theories and our world 3 plans causally influence the physical objects of world 1; that they have a causal action upon world 1. (1980: 164) In the final analysis it is the causal interaction between the worlds that ultimately matters in Popper’s objectivist epistemology: it allows him to represent the growth of human knowledge as an evolutionary process of exosomatic adaptations, which is ultimately a function of the interplay of relations between the physical and mental worlds and the world of objective knowledge or thought content.

      Seems similar to a notion in [[neoplatonism]] that the "forms" (eidos) emanate down.

      Also seems related to [[John Vervaeke]]'s notion of there being a multi-level ontology (which he claims is in neoplatonism).

    2. hypostatising abstractions

      In other word, "reification" or treating abstractions as if they were concrete real events or physical entities.

    3. memory engrams in the brain

      A theoretical construct in neuroscience/neuropsychology that is

      a unit of cognitive information imprinted in a physical substance, theorized to be the means by which memories are stored[1] as biophysical or biochemical[2] changes in the brain or other biological tissue, in response to external stimuli. (wiki)

      Cf. this note to a 2015 neuroscience paper that purports that it's been "found/discovered".

    1. Since I think this is such an important issue for science, I have been working to create a system to do this which launched in the summer of 2022, called Octopus.ac with the backing of Research England. In a way, it’s pulling together the attempts to avoid publication bias and incentives for questionable research practices of initiatives such as the Journal for Negative Results, Registered Reports, or F1000, the faster sharing offered by preprint servers, and the breaking up of narrative formats championed by similar platforms such as ResearchEquals. A holistic approach, though, I think is important. Researchers need to know where the version of record is and how their work will be judged in order to know where to write for and how to write.

      [[Octopus.ac]] is a potential alternative to [[ResearchEquals]] for open publishing founded by [[Alexandra Freeman]]. Appears to be attempting to avoid the tension for academic journals to be both "informative" and "persuasive". Seems to fall within the general [[open science]] movement.

    1. In the case of ResearchEquals the author must pay if they want to have their work published using a more restrictive Creative Commons license. Octopus also employs Creative Commons licenses, but requires one which allows derivative works. The publication types in Octopus are based on the eight stages of scientific research: Research Problem Rationale/Hypothesis Method Results Analysis Interpretation Real World Application Peer Review For ResearchEquals there are many more publication types and they are called modules. Thus, enabling the publication of text, data, code and media. With both platforms, each publication is assigned its own DOI. __ATA.cmd.push(function() { __ATA.initDynamicSlot({ id: 'atatags-26942-64c40660082d9', location: 120, formFactor: '001', label: { text: 'Advertisements', }, creative: { reportAd: { text: 'Report this ad', }, privacySettings: { text: 'Privacy', } } }); });

      Compares the difference between [[Octopus.ac]] and [[ResearchEquals]] platforms in the [[open science]] movement. Looks like Octopus is more strictly matching the [[eight stages of scientific research]], whereas RE allows for more options (including "publication of text, data, code and media.") Notably, each platform gives a [[DOI]] to each publication.

      Questions:

      Does each module in RE get it's own DOI?

      Likewise, does each publication type in Octopus get it's own DOI?

      Do either of these address the concern of other academics "scooping" each other's work?

    1. [[Octopus.ac]] is a potential alternative to [[ResearchEquals]], but notably doesn't mention RE anywhere on it's site (whereas RE does mention Octopus.ac in it's FAQs). Specifically, it's comparison is here.

      Each of their platforms seem to be related to the [[open science]] movement.

    1. A similar strategy: branches are useful when collaborating with co-authors who don't/won't use HG/GIT/etc.. In that case, it is useful to branch of a copy of the paper as it existed at the time when you sent the draft to co-author X; then when you later get comments/diffs/changes, you can apply them and then merge. – D.W. Nov 20, 2012 at 5:53

      A helpful tip on how to use [[branches]] via [[Git]] or another [[version control system]] when writing academic papers.

      It was made by [[D.W.]] on the [[Academia]] [[StackExchange]] site. It's in regards to working with authors who don't use Git, etc.

      The idea is to make a separate branch for the version you send a specific co-author which seems like a good idea.

    1. See also: Got 15 minutes and want to learn Git? git + LaTeX workflow at StackOverflow Writing the PhD thesis: the tools Part I Collaborating with LaTeX and git at ShareLaTeX blog - a great and comprehensive tutorial What are the advantages of using version control (git, CVS etc) in LaTeX documents - TeX.SE https://tex.stackexchange.com/search?q=version+control

      Some links to resources on using [[LaTeX]] and [[Git]] suggested by [[Piotr Migdal]].

      This was part of his top-voted answer to "Why use [[version control system]]s for writing a paper?" on the [[Academia]] [[StackExchange]] site.

      Was looking into the tools available for [[open science]] collaborations.

    1. People absolutely try. I can't name the journals that try these off the top of my head, but as you can see from that Wikipedia section, there are journals that: Do double-blind peer review (authors don't know who the reviewers are, and vice versa) Do triple-blind peer review (authors & editors & reviewers don't know who each other are) Do open peer review (everyone knows who everyone else is) Do open peer reports (reviews are published together with the paper) Do open participation (reviewers self-select to review the paper) Do post-publication peer review (every paper is published, reviews are done after publication) Do results-blind peer review (reviewers receive a manuscript where the results & conclusions are omitted) Do two-stage results-blind peer review (review done in two stages; in the first stage reviewers don't know the results/conclusions, in the second stage they do) Do novelty-blind peer review (reviewers are specifically instructed not to comment on whether the paper is novel, only if it is correct) The fact that the traditional model has endured is a sign of how robust it is. Everyone knows it is flawed, but nobody has been able to come up with a better model. ShareShare a link to this answer (Includes your user id)Copy linkCC BY-SA 4.0 Edit Follow Follow this answer to receive notifications answered Jan 5 at 7:58 Allure

      A response by [[Allure]] to an [[Academia]] [[StackExchange]] question about alternative publishing models for scientific experiments that help deal with the [[replication crisis]].

      In the comments, Allure suggests that journals that "Do results-blind peer review (reviewers receive a manuscript where the results & conclusions are omitted)" encourage publishing "non-significant results".

    1. How to protect scientific open research from being patented?

      A helpful question on [[Academia]] [[StackExchange]] about preventing [[open science]] research from being patented.

      The top answer from [[Gilles 'SO- stop being evil']] suggests simply publishing one's research protects it (since the disclosure counts as prior art.

      So even if an someone invents something, you publishing it stops someone from being able to file a patent on it (except in countries that have a grace period for inventors, like the US).

      The only risk remaining is that you (or fellow inventor you worked with) take advantage of the grace period in countries that have this.

      Some research institutions (public or private) have a formal practice of defensive publications: publish potential inventions that they don't intent to patent as soon as possible, in order to block anyone else from patenting them. Technically, any publication is a public disclosure, including an arXiv preprint, a blog post, or even a research seminar if it's legally open to external visitors. However, since it's easier to fight a patent before it's granted, it is advantageous to make it easy for patent examiners to find the defensive publication.

      If you're concerned about someone filing a patent on something you discovered, or for that matter anything that you know about, you can watch patent applications. Patent applications are published for a period of at least a few months, during which time anyone can point the patent examiner to something that they consider to be prior art. Stack Exchange participates in this process through their Patents site where people can coordinate prior art searches.

  5. www.researchequals.com www.researchequals.com
    1. How is ResearchEquals different from Octopus? Isn't it the same? We get that question a lot! Octopus is indeed similar. The main differences are: ResearchEquals allows you to link any steps together, Octopus has a specific order of events ResearchEquals allows for a wide variety of steps (focus on provenance), Octopus has 8 specific ones (focused on empirical cycles mostly) It's a flavor difference mostly. Like onion rings and calamari.

      What [[ResearchEquals]] claims is different between it's platform and that of [[Octopus.ac]].

    1. Learned about this because

      [[ResearchEquals]] is a Liberate Science GmbH project, which is funded by the [[Shuttleworth Foundation]] until the end of 2022.

    1. weakly informative approach to Bayesian analysis

      In [[Richard McElreath]]'s [[Statistical Rethinking]], he defines [[weakly informative priors]] (aka [[regularizing priors]]) as

      priors that gently nudge the machine [which] usually improve inference. Such priors are sometimes called regularizing or weakly informative priors. They are so useful that non-Bayesian statistical procedures have adopted a mathematically equivalent approach, [[penalized likelihood]]. (p. 35, 1st ed.)

    1. Finding the engramSheena A. Josselyn1–4, Stefan Köhler5,6 and Paul W. Frankland1–4Abstract | Many attempts have been made to localize the physical trace of a memory, orengram, in the brain. However, until recently, engrams have remained largely elusive. In thisReview, we develop four defining criteria that enable us to critically assess the recentprogress that has been made towards finding the engram. Recent ‘capture’ studies use novelapproaches to tag populations of neurons that are active during memory encoding, therebyallowing these engram-associated neurons to be manipulated at later times. We proposethat findings from these capture studies represent considerable progress in allowing us toobserve, erase and express the engram

      A 2015 neuroscience paper that gives 4 criteria for what an [[engram]] is, and argues that recent (at the time) developments in certain laboratory mice experiments suggested that engrams do exist.

    1. Science is not described by thefalsification standard, as Popper recognized and argued.4 In fact, deductive falsification isimpossible in nearly every scientific context. In this section, I review two reasons for thisimpossibility.(1) Hypotheses are not models. The relations among hypotheses and different kinds ofmodels are complex. Many models correspond to the same hypothesis, and manyhypotheses correspond to a single model. This makes strict falsification impossible.(2) Measurement matters. Even when we think the data falsify a model, another ob-server will debate our methods and measures. They don’t trust the data. Sometimesthey are right.For both of these reasons, deductive falsification never works. The scientific method cannotbe reduced to a statistical procedure, and so our statistical methods should not pretend.

      Seems consistent with how Popper used the terms [[falsification]] and [[falsifiability]] noted here

    2. Statistical RethinkingA Bayesian Coursewith Examplesin R and StanRichard McElreath

      A companion book to [[Richard McElreath]]'s phenomenal lecture course [[Statistical Rethinking]] which he made freely available here.

      Note that this is the 1st ed. of the book (2015).

      source

    3. Statisticians, for theirpart, can derive pleasure from scolding scientists, which just makes the psychological battleworse.

      Note to self: don't do this.

    4. So where do priors come from? They are engineering assumptions, chosen to help themachine learn. The flat prior in Figure 2.5 is very common, but it is hardly ever the best prior.You’ll see later in the book that priors that gently nudge the machine usually improve infer-ence. Such priors are sometimes called regularizing or weakly informative priors.They are so useful that non-Bayesian statistical procedures have adopted a mathematicallyequivalent approach, penalized likelihood. These priors are conservative, in that theytend to guard against inferring strong associations between variables.

      p. 35 where [[Richard McElreath]] defines [[weakly informative priors]] aka [[regularizing priors]] in [[Bayesian statistics]]. Notes that non-Bayesian methods have a mathematically equivalent approach called [[penalized likelihood]].

    5. The other imagines instead that population size fluctuates through time, which can be trueeven when there is no selective difference among alleles.

      McElreath is referring to \(\text{P}_{0\text{B}}\) (process model zero-B).

    6. one assumes the population size andstructure have been constant long enough for the distribution of alleles to reach a steady state

      The population size & structure being "constant" is what [[Richard McElreath]] means by "equilibrium" in \(\text{P}_{0\text{A}}\) (process model zero-A), which corresponds to the null hypothesis

      \(\text{H}_0: \text{``Evolution is neutral"}\)

    7. Andrew Gelman’s

      Per Andrew Gelman's wiki:

      Andrew Eric Gelman (born February 11, 1965) is an American statistician and professor of statistics and political science at Columbia University.

      Gelman received bachelor of science degrees in mathematics and in physics from MIT, where he was a National Merit Scholar, in 1986. He then received a master of science in 1987 and a doctor of philosophy in 1990, both in statistics from Harvard University, under the supervision of Donald Rubin.[1][2][3]

    1. Popper 1983, Introduction 1982: "We must distinguish two meanings of the expressions falsifiable and falsifiability:"1) Falsifiable as a logical-technical term, in the sense of the demarcation criterion of falsifiability. This purely logical concept — falsifiable in principle, one might say — rests on a logical relation between the theory in question and the class of basic statements (or the potential falsifiers described by them)."2) Falsifiable in the sense that the theory in question can definitively or conclusively or demonstrably be falsified ("demonstrably falsifiable")."I have always stressed that even a theory which is obviously falsifiable in the first sense is never falsifiable in this second sense. (For this reason I have used the expression falsifiable as a rule only in the first, technical sense. In the second sense, I have as a rule spoken not of falsifiability but rather of falsification and of its problems)."

      A passage from [[Karl Popper]] about how he distinguishes between [[falsifiability]] and [[falsification]].

      Popper's "falsification" seems related to [[Imre Lakatos]]'s notion that a [[research programme]] has a [[hard core]]

      of central theses that are deemed irrefutable—or, at least, refutation-resistant—by methodological fiat. (Musgrave & Pigden 2021, SEP article linked below)

      Also, what Popper calls "falsifiable"/"falsifiability" is similar to Lakatos's

      [[protective belt]] of [[auxiliary hypotheses]] which has to bear the brunt of tests and gets adjusted and re-adjusted, or even completely replaced, to defend the thus-hardened core. (FMSRP: 48)

      [[Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes]]

      There's seems to be a curious reversal between Popper & Lakatos. The theoretical component for Lakatos (ie, the "hard core") can't be falsified, whereas the theoretical component for Popper (ie, something being "falsifiable in principle") is a

      purely logical concept … [that] rests on a logical relation between the theory in question and the class of basic statements (or the potential falsifiers described by them). (Popper 1982, from passage above)

      A crucial difference between Lakatos & Popper is that for Lakatos

      A research programme can be falsifiable (in some senses) but unscientific and scientific but unfalsifiable. (Musgrave & Pigden 2021, SEP article linked below)

      This seems in direct conflict with one of Popper's views that falsifiability can serve as a [[demarcation criterion]] for what is scientific and non-scientific.

      Cf. 2.2 of "Imre Lakatos" on SEP

    1. Credibility Without Institutions - Mike Elias - Idea Market

      Good interview with [[Mike Elias]] about [[IdeaMarket]]. Speaks highly of CTO [[Alexander Schlindwein (bobface)]] who purportedly made more money than anyone finding bugs in [[cryptocurrency]].

    1. A useful website to provide some high-level metrics to try to determine if a particular [[cryptocurrency]] is a scam. Of particular note is that it gives a "commit count", number of news results, and sentiment.

    1. "No original research" (NOR) is one of three core content policies that, along with Neutral point of view and Verifiability, determines the type and quality of material acceptable in articles. Because these policies work in harmony, they should not be interpreted in isolation from one another, and editors should familiarize themselves with all three.

      The 3 core content policies of [[Wikipedia]] articles: - no original research - neutral point of view - verifiability

      The comment about how the policies work in harmony & shouldn't be interpreted in isolation gave me an idea. Maybe various virtues function similarly. Also, it seems like [[Forrest Landry]]'s 3 [[modalities]] have this quality.

    1. The reason the world seems to surround the observer instead of havinga window-like boundary is primarily that the ambient optic array sur-rounds the individual and has no boundary. Note again that, since theretina moves relative to the image projected from the array, it is theretina that has a boundary, not the image. The eye successively samplesthe available array, and its retina successively samples a correspondingpotential image. This latter concept is a very strange one inded, and itwill be considered later.

      Claims retina has boundary but the image doesn't.<br /> - eye samples available ambient optic array - retina samples a corresponding potential image

    2. The leaves of a tree face in all directions so as to pick up the energyin ambient light and use it for photosynthesis. But the tree cannot pickup the information in ambient light and use it for behavior. The animalcan. His receptors use energy, of course, for photochemical reactions andnervous excitation, but his eyes use differences of energy in differentdirections. The information lies in the structure of ambient light, that is,in its having an arrangement or being an array. The structure maychange in regular ways, as we have noted, but it has to be present forthe information to exist, and even for the change to occur

      Information is used by animals (with organs or perceptual systems). The info is in the structure of ambient light (which is the same as saying that is info is from the ambient light having an arrangement or being an array).

    3. Only one eye is shown in the illustration. The two simultaneous over-lapping arrays admitted to the two eyes are quite another factor in theperceptual situation. Since they converge to station-points that are sepa-rated by about two and a half inches, they are not the same array.They are slightly different perspective mappings of the room; therefore,when they are treated as overlapping fields the pattern of one is not con-gruent with the pattern of the other, as noted in the last chapter

      Convergence to different station-points implies different arrays (but not sure if either effective or ambient?)

    4. Figure 10.7 The flow velocltles in the optic array reflectedfrom the surface of the earth. This is the flow pattern obtainedwith locomotion parallel to the earth in the direction of the pole atthe top of the graph. The vectors are plotted in angular coordinates.This is a view from above, whereas Figure 9.3 was a view from theside.

      Visual of the flow velocities in the optic array.

    5. Figure 10.6 The transformation of the optic array obtained by alocomotor movement (Stage 6). The solid lines represent the opticarray before the observer stands up, the dashed lines after he has moved.The path of locomotion of the head is forward and upward. The wholearray is transformed, including the invisible portion behind the head, butthe latter is not represented in the drawing.

      The "optic array" can be transformed? Later Gibson states that "transformation" is just one of the

      vast variety of optical "motions"

    6. Figure 10.5 The effective array at a stationary convergence point(Stage 5). The solid lines represent the sample of the total optic arraythat is admitted to a human eye in a given posture. The dashed linesrepresent the remainder of the array, which is available for stimulationbut not effective at this moment.

      Visual example of an "effective array" along with the broader "optic array".

    7. Figure 9.14 The disparity betweeu the optic array admittedto one eye and that admitted to the other. The observer is look-ing down to the horizon. F is the point of fixation. The left eyeis closer to the left-hand side of the road; the right eye to the right-hand side of the road. The array in one eye is skewed relative tothat in the other, and the disparity increases from the horizon downto the locus of the observer's own body, as shown. When the ob-server's eyes converge and fixate on the road 30° downward fromthe horizon, the disparity above this point changes in sign but theskew relations are not altered. Note that these diagrams are cross-sections of the light sampled by each eye, not retinal images. (AfterGibson, 1950.)

      Example of a different optic arrays admitted to different eyes.

    8. The total field of view of a typical fish. Eacheye embraces more than a hemisphere of the ambient array, so thatthere is a double registration of the field in front and nearly pano-ramic vision. (After G. L. Walls, The Vertebrate Eye, CranbrookInstitute of Science, Bulletin No. 19, 1942.)

      Picture to visualize eyes of fish embracing "more than a hemisphere of the ambient array"

    9. Let us review the proposals made so far. Stimulus energy, unless ithas structure, conveys no information. The natural structure of stimula-tion from the near environment conveys information directly. The struc-ture of stimulation from representations conveys similar information, but

      indirectly. The structure of stimulation from socially coded or conventional signals conveys information still more indirectly. All these are information about the environment, although an increasingly remote environment. Finally the structure of stimulation from the displays of artists and experimenters on perception, from "abstract" art and the various devices for stimulating human eyes by artifice, conveys information in a pure mathematical sense. I have called it information as such.

      More clear picture of what Gibson mean's by "information"

    10. How can we accept the physical theory of light and believe at thesame time that information about an external object must be conveyedby light? The latter is implied whenever we say that the object stimulatesthe eye. The outline of an answer was suggested in Chapter 1 (pp. 12-13,14-15). We can escape the paradox by distinguishing between radiantlight and ambient light - that is, between light emitted from an energysource and light reflected by the environment as a source. The convey-ing of information about surfaces by light of the latter kind is conceiv-able. To justify such a theory, however, the known laws of physicaloptics need to be supplemented with quite unfamiliar laws of ecologicaloptics

      Argues that distinguishing between

      • "radiant light" (light emitted from an energy source)

      • "ambient light" (light reflected by the environment as a source)

      resolves issue of - wanting a physical theory of light - wanting info about objects to be conveyed by light

      But needs ecological optics to be combined with physical optics to justify this theory.

    11. In this chapter it is assumed that information means information about,or specification of. In the next chapter another and quite different mean-ing of the term will be recognized - information as structure. Ambientlight must have structure if it is to carry information about the environ-ment, but not all structure carries this sort of information.

      Notes difference of "information about"/"specification of" something vs. "information as structure".

    12. The difference between energy and information has been emphasizedin all of these chapters but the difference has not yet been made explicit.I have suggested that while energy is relevant to receptor-cells, informa-tion is relevant to organs, and that the stimulus for an organ or a per-ceptual system is of higher order than the stimulus for a cell. The heartof the question, however, is to explain how stimulus energy may carryor contain information. It is not how information might be picked upthat needs to be decided first, but simply whether it exists

      Defines - stimulus energy as relevant to [[receptor-cell]]s - stimulus information as relevant to [[organ]] or [[perceptual system]]

    13. A clear distinc-tion has been made between things that are sources of stimulation, eitherin the environment or in a laboratory, and the stimuli themselves. Theformer are objects, events, surfaces, places, substances, pictures, and otheranimals. The latter are patterns and transformations of energy at re-ceptors. A stimulus may specify its source, but it is clearly not the samething as its source.

      Defines "stimulus".

    14. In speaking, painting, sculpting, and writing, the human animal learnedto make sources of stimulation for his fellows, and to stimulate himselfin doing so. These sources, admittedly, are of a special sort, unlike thesources in the "natural" environment. They are "artificial" sources. Theygenerate a new kind of perception in man, which might be called knowl-edge, or perception at second hand. The so-called accumulation of knowl-edge in a society of men, however, depends wholly on communication,

      on ways of getting stimuli to the sense organs of individuals.

      Defines "knowledge" as "perception at second hand".

    15. Again, the information can be given by chemical, optical, or acousticstimulation. A whiff of odor can mean precisely the lamb to the ewe.A gaping movement can denote the nestling to the mother bird, and aflash of color can denote the mother to the nestling (thereby producingthe gaping response). Sounds do the same; the cries of both young andold carry simple but definite information.

      "information" can be given by a variety of stimuli.

    16. The environment consists of opportunities for perception, of availableinformation, of potential stimuli. Not all opportunities are grasped,not all information is registered, not all stimuli excite receptors. Butwhat the environment affords an individual in the way of discriminationis enormous, and this should be our first consideration. The animateenvironment affords even more than the physical environment does sinceanimals have more characteristics than things and are more changeable.

      "information" seems to pertain to things in the environment

    17. The atmosphere, then, is a medium. A medium permits more or lessunhindered movements of animals and displacements of objects. Funda-mentally, I suggest, this is what is meant by "space." But a medium hasother equally important properties. It also permits the flou; of informa-tion. It permits the flux of light, it transmits vibration, and it mediatesthe diffusion of volatile substances. Only by illumination do animals"see" things, only by vibration do they "hear" things, and only by diffu-sion do they "smell" things. I shall argue that in these three ways variousproperties of a thing are broadcast, as it were, when it is illuminated, orvibrating, or chemically volatile.

      Gives definition of "medium": - allows animals move - allows objects get displaced - allows the "flow of information"

    18. These five perceptual systems overlap one another; they are not mutuallyexclusive. They often focus on the same information - that is, the sameinformation can be picked up by a combination of perceptual systemsworking together as well as by one perceptual system working alone.

      If the 5 perceptual systems are "looking, listening, sniffing, tasting, and touching", then I'm not sure what "information" would be the same. What does Gibson mean by "information"?

    19. Besides the changes in stimuli from place to place and from time totime, it can also be shown that certain higher-order variables of stimulusenergy - ratios and proportions, for example - do not change. Theyremain invariant with movements of the observer and with changes inthe intensity of stimulation. The description of such stimulus invariantsis a main concern of the chapters to follow. And it will be shown thatthese invariants of the energy flux at the receptors of an organism corre-spond to the permanent properties of the environment. They constitute,therefore, information about the permanent environment.

      Argues higer-order variables of stimulus energy don't change. Seems like he'll be trying to provide a [[taxonomy]] (ie, classification and description) of these invariants.

    20. The reader should make allowance for the double meaning of the verbto sense. The detecting of stimulus information without any awarenessof what sense organ has been excited, or of the quality of "the receptor,can be described as "sensationless perception." But this does not meanthat perception can occur without stimulation of receptors; it only meansthat organs of perception are sometimes stimulated in such a way thatthey are not specified in consciousness. Perception cannot be "extra-sensory," if that means without any input; it can only be so if that meanswithout awareness of the visual, auditory, or other quality of the input.·An example of this is the "obstacle sense" of the blind, which is felt as"facial vision" but is actually auditory echo detection. The blind man"senses" the wall in front of him without realizing what sense has beenstimulated. In short, there can be sensationless perception, but notinformationless perception.

      For Gibson, can't have perception without some sensory input (but it can happen without awareness of the quality of the input).

    21. The active observer gets invariant perceptions despite varying sensa-tions. He perceives a constant object by vision despite changing sensa-tions of light; he perceives a constant object by feel despite changingsensations of pressure; he perceives the same source of sound despitechanging sensations of loudness in his ears. The hypothesis is that con-stant perception depends on the ability of the individual to detect theinvariants, and that he ordinarily pays no attention whatever to the fluxof changing sensations.The ways in which animals and men pick up information by looking,listening, sniffing, tasting, and touching are the subject of this book

      The core topic of [[James Gibson]]'s book [[The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems]].

    22. But the fact is that there are two different meaningsof the verb to sense, first, to detect something, and second, to have a sensa-tion. When the senses are considered as perceptual systems the firstmeaning of the term is being used.

      [[perceptual systems]] are when the senses "detect" something (as opposed to give a feeling).

    23. It will here be suggested that the senses can obtain informa-tion about objects in the world without the intervention of an intellectualprocess - or at least that they can do so when they operate as perceptualsystems.

      Argues that humans (and other animals) can get info about objects in the world using only [[perceptual systems]].

    24. It will be evident in Chap-ter 2 that the so-called sense organs are of at least two different sorts: thepassive receptors that respond each to its appropriate form of energy,and the active perceptual organs, better called systems, that can searchout the information in stimulus energy. The receptors have measurablethresholds below which they are not excited; the organs and systems donot have fixed thresholds except as they depend on receptors.

      Specifies 2 different types of sense organs: - passive receptors - active perceptual organs (ie, perceptual systems)

    25. When we stub-bornly continue to mean by taste a mode of attention that cuts acrossthe classification of receptors we are only recognizing the fact that re-ceptors may be functionally united when anatomically separated. Infact, the word palate, although used in anatomy to mean the back of themouth, is used in gastronomy to mean the whole complex of receptorscontributing to palatability, that is, an organ of perception.

      The only time in this book that [[James Gibson]] uses the term [[organ of perception]]

    26. The organs of sensitivity, like other organs of the body, exist in a hier-archy of organization. Lower organs are subordinated to higher. Smallerstructures serve larger structures, and they overlap. The eyeball is "all ofa piece," but it is an unusual sense organ. The ear, the functional auditoryorgan, is not a single piece of tissue, and the organ of touch is dispersedover the whole body. The receptive and the adjustive parts of an organneed not be in the same place. The olfactory organ that we call the nose,that is, the functional nose, has its receptive part deep in the facial bonesbut its motor part in the chest muscles for breathing and sniffing. Thereceptive and the adjustive part can only be understood in relation to oneanother.

      [[James Gibson]]'s notion of [[organs of sensitivity]] continued.

    27. • ORGANS. An organ of sensitivity is a structure containing many energyreceptors and many receptive units that can adjust so as to modify theinput from cells and units. An organ must therefore have muscles, andthey must be supplied with efferent fibers from the central nervous system.:rhe afferent and efferent fibers, incoming and outgoing, may be gatheredin a single bundle, a nerve, like the nerve from each eye, or they may bedistributed in many bundles, like the fibers from the skin. The so-calledsensorynerves are anatomical expedients; there is not a specific nerve foreach sense despite a popular idea to the contrary.

      [[James Gibson]]'s definition of [[organ of sensitivity]]

    1. Penrose is a framework for specifying how mathematical statements should be interpreted as visual diagrams. A clean separation between abstractmathematical objects and their visual representation provides new capabilities beyond existing code- or GUI-based tools. Here, for instance, the same set ofstatements (left) is given three different visual interpretations (right), via Euclidean, spherical, and hyperbolic geometry. (Further samples are shown in Fig. 29.)

      A definition of what Penrose is.

    2. A paper recommended by Pablo B. which is about the implementation of a software for iterative visualizations. Looks very promising

    3. Fig. 2. An optimization-based approachhas myriad benefits. Here a logically in-consistent program fails gracefully, pro-viding visual intuition for why the givenstatements cannot hold.

      A wonderful use case for Penrose which reminds me of how many of my proofs in general/point-set topology would go.

    4. The resulting system effec-tively models diagram genera-tion as a compilation process,where the compilation targetis a constrained optimizationproblem rather than (say) a bi-nary executable or a static im-age.

      A neat idea of using compilation to target [[constrained optimization problem]] instead of a binary executable or static image.

    1. In contrast to visuospatial attention, language function is widely accepted to lateralize to the (dominant) left hemisphere (Friederici, 2017). Tissue damage to the left temporo-parietal cortex has been reported, for decades, to cause impairments of semantic processing – key to reading and other elaborate forms of language comprehension (Binder et al., 2009; Hartwigsen et al., 2016; Seghier, 2013).

      Suggests the [[left hemisphere of the brain]] is the primary part when using language.

    1. superior parietal lobule

      The [[superior parietal lobule]] is thought to be involved in: - action processes - visually guided visuomotor functions - visual perception - spatial cognition - reasoning - working memory - attention

      The three types of connectivity-based parcellations consistently identified five subregions in the SPL of each hemisphere. The two anterior subregions were found to be primarily involved in action processes and in visually guided visuomotor functions, whereas the three posterior subregions were primarily associated with visual perception, spatial cognition, reasoning, working memory, and attention. (Jiaojian Wang et al., 2014) source

      It's also been grouped within the [[dorsal attention network]] per source1 and source2

    2. To disentangle the various measures used in different studies, we distinguish three main measures: network activation, network intra-connectivity, and network interconnectivity.

      Three main measures used: - [[network activation]] - [[network intra-connectivity]] - [[network interconnectivity]]

    3. precuneus

      PCu is involved in the [[default mode network]].

    4. PCC

      [[posterior cingulate cortex]] which is part of the [[default mode network]]

    5. Here, the primary regions that are focused are the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), precuneus (PCu), and medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) for the DMN; dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) for the CEN; and the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and insula for the SN.
      • [[default mode network]]
        • [[posterior cingulate cortex]]
        • [[precuneus]]
        • [[medial prefrontal cortex]]
      • [[frontoparietal network]]/[[central executive network]]
        • [[dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex]]
      • [[salience network]]
        • [[anterior cingulate cortex]]
        • [[insula]]
    6. RS

      resting state

    7. PCC

      [[posterior cingulate cortex]]

    8. In a recent meta-analysis, Fox et al. (2016) narrowed meditation into four general categories: focused attention meditation (FAM), mantra recitation meditation (MRM), open monitoring meditation (OMM), and loving-kindness and compassion meditation (LKM). In addition, Josipovic et al. (2012) illustrated that a unique form of meditation that has a very precise orientation toward experiencing nondual awareness (nondual awareness meditation) shows a distinct neural signature when compared to FAM and OMM, that is why it has been added here as a distinct form of meditation.

      A high level view of 5 kinds of meditation: - [[focused attention meditation]] - [[mantra recitation meditation]] - [[open monitoring meditation]] - [[loving-kindness and compassion meditation]] - [[nondual awareness meditation]]

      The first 4 come from a [[meta-analysis]] in 2016, while the 5th is added since [[Josipovic]] and colleagues have purportedly shown that [[nondual awareness meditation]] has different neurological patterns than [[focused attention meditation]] and [[open monitoring meditation]].

    9. Coinciding with CEN activity is the connectivity between the DMN and CEN networks of the brain: effort is needed to suppress DMN hyperactivity and activate the CEN (negative connectivity/anticorrelation), which evolves to a coactivation (positive connectivity) of the two networks. This coactivation is affiliated with experience of explicit nondual awareness.

      Suggests that [[nonduality]] corresponds to coactivation of [[frontoparietal network]] and [[default mode network]].

    10. A visual depiction of the transition from effortful to effortless meditation.

      Interesting that the [[default mode network]] and [[frontoparietal network]] connectivity goes down (from naïve to developing meditator) and then goes up much higher (from developing meditator to proficient meditator). Seems like the DMN is suppressed to allow for more CEN/FN activation during a developing meditator's practice. Seems like the eventual transition of allowing co-activation of the DMN and the CEN/FN is associated with the "effortless" described in [[nondual awareness]] [[meditation]] like what [[Diana Winston]] calls [[natural awareness]] in the series [[The Spectrum of Awareness]] or what [[Loch Kelly]] teaches in his series [[Effortless Mindfulness]] (both of which are on the [[Waking Up app]]).

    11. Proficient meditation unravels a deeper social and ecological intero-exteroceptive layer of self where it is intimately connected with the environment in a nondual manner. This hints upon a more basic and fundamental notion of self where it is determined by and through its relationship to the other/environment. Reaching beyond the duality of self-other/environment, this deeper relational layer of self is intrinsically neuro-ecological and neuro-social. That connects this deeper layer of self intimately with both other and world in a positive way, that is, integrated and rather than segregated. Proficient meditation can thus provide us with a deeper level in our experience of the own self, a nondual experience where our self is integrated with the other and part of the wider world, as discussed in previous neurophenomenological models of explicit nondual awareness (Josipovic 2019, 2021). This allows to lay bare a deeper ecological and social nondual layer not only of ourself but, correspondingly, also of our brain featured by its deeper most basic and fundamental nondual spatial topography serving as its default or baseline.

      Argues that getting good at [[meditation]] gets at a more fundamental kind of a sense of self that's connected to the other/environment.

    12. It should be noted that the explicit experience of nondual awareness may be increasingly likely during a more open form of attention like OMM, LKM, or NDA, as opposed to FAM.

      [[nonduality]] may be more likely from attention not being narrowed, such as [[open monitoring meditation]], [[Metta]] or [[loving-kindness and compassion meditation]], and [[nondual awareness meditation]] such as [[Effortless Mindfulness]].

    13. FAM

      [[focused attention meditation]]

    14. SN

      [[salience network]]

    15. MHM

      mean hours of meditation

    16. MHM

      mean hours of meditation

    17. CEN

      The [[frontoparietal network]] is

      involved in sustained attention, complex problem-solving and working memory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontoparietal_network

    18. CEN

      The [[central executive network]] is often a synonym for [[frontoparietal network]].

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontoparietal_network#Nomenclature

    19. PCu

      [[precuneus]] which is involved in imagination, [[self-consciousness]], and reflecting on memories.

      https://www.brainfacts.org/3d-brain#intro=false&focus=Brain-cerebral_hemisphere-pareital_lobe-precuneus

    20. ACC

      [[anterior cingulate cortex]] which is involved in processing emotional distress of pain. It's part of the [[cingulate cortex]] which is a part of the [[limbic system]].

      https://www.brainfacts.org/3d-brain#intro=false&focus=Brain-cerebral_hemisphere-temporal_lobe-cingulate_cortex

    21. CEN

      [[central executive network]]

    22. LKM

      [[loving-kindness and compassion meditation]]

    23. NDA

      [[nondual awareness meditation]]

    24. OMM

      [[open monitoring meditation]]

    25. FAM

      [[focused attention meditation]]

    26. vmPFC

      [[ventromedial prefrontal cortex]]

    27. RS

      resting state

    1. The DAN consists of the intraparietal sulcus/superior parietal lobule, frontal eye fields, and extrastriate visual areas. Further discussion of CEN in this paper includes DAN in line with the work of Sridharan et al. (27) and Menon and Uddin (28).

      They define the [[dorsal attention network]] as consisting of: - [[intraparietal sulcus]]/[[superior parietal lobule]] - [[frontal eye fields]] - [[extrastriate visual areas]]

    2. Depending on the researcher, CEN is often referred to as the executive-control network (ECN), or the frontoparietal network (FPN), and is sometimes divided to CEN and the dorsal attention network (DAN) [i.e., Ref. (29)].

      Suggests that - [[central executive network]] - [[executive-control network]] - [[frontoparietal network]] are synonymous.

    1. It has been demonstrated that areas most commonly activated following top-down cues to attend to particular locations, features, or objects are located along the dorsal parts of the parietal cortex. Such areas include inferior parietal lobule (IPL), dorsomedial regions referred to as superior parietal lobule (SPL), as well as more medial regions along the precuneus gyrus (Yantis et al., 2002; Giesbrecht et al., 2003; Liu et al., 2003; Yantis and Serences, 2003; Figure 1). Several top-down tasks have been shows to successfully engage dorsal regions of the parietal cortex, namely those involving spatial (Kastner et al., 1999; Corbetta et al., 2000; Hopfinger et al., 2000; Shomstein and Behrmann, 2006; Chiu and Yantis, 2009; Greenberg et al., 2010) as well as non-spatial shifts of attention (Giesbrecht et al., 2003; Yantis and Serences, 2003; Shomstein and Yantis, 2004b, 2006; Tamber-Rosenau et al., 2011).

      Suggests that [[top-down tasks]] that involve spatial & non-spatial shifts of attention activate:<br /> - [[inferior parietal lobule]] - [[superior parietal lobule]] - medial regions along the [[precuneus gyrus]]

    1. In summary, our review of current models of the visual system, suggest that the human IPL poses a real challenge to existing dichotomies. We argue that different aspects of IPL function are not adequately captured by these schemes. Our appraisal of imaging, electrophysiological and lesion findings regarding the IPL suggest that it plays a crucial role in flexibly reconfiguring behaviour between two states: maintaining attention on current task goals and responding to salient information and new events in the world around us.

      Suggests that the [[inferior parietal lobule]] is important to changing behavior between 2 states: - maintaining attention on current task goals - responding to salient info & new events in our environment

    2. Many authors might agree broadly with their contention that the temporal lobe is specialized for perception while the superior parietal lobe (SPL) has a crucial role in the visual guidance of action.

      Suggests the [[superior parietal lobule]] is involved with using vision to help do some action.

    3. A paper that gives an overview of the different roles that have been proposed for the [[inferior parietal lobule]], and proposes an alternative account.

    4. cytoarchitechtonic observations

      From wiki

      Cytoarchitecture (Greek κύτος= "cell" + ἀρχιτεκτονική= "architecture"), also known as cytoarchitectonics, is the study of the cellular composition of the central nervous system's tissues under the microscope.

    1. In addition, methods such as structural equation modeling (Gonçalves and Hall 2003) and Granger causality (Goebel et al. 2003) may shed light on the direction of causality as well as whether the observed correlations are direct or indirect.
      • [ ] look into [[structural equation modeling]] and [[Granger causality]]
    2. motion-sensitive middle temporal area (MT+)
      • [ ] check what "MT+" stands for
    3. The frontoparietal control system includes many regions identified as supporting cognitive control and decision-making processes including lateral prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, and inferior parietal lobule.

      Suggests the [[frontoparietal control network]] includes: - [[lateral prefrontal cortex]] - [[anterior cingulate cortex]] - [[inferior parietal lobule]]

    4. Both the anterior inferior parietal lobule and the superior parietal lobule, which are correlated with the aPFC and MT+, respectively, commonly increase activity concurrently during task performance. For example, Crone and colleagues (2006) reported activity increases in both superior and inferior parietal lobule when participants switched from univalent rules to bivalent rules during a stimulus-response association task. Further, Sapir et al. (2005) demonstrated that while regions within the dorsal attention system were modulated during the processing of behaviorally relevant visual cues, a region in the aIPL of the frontoparietal control system was highly predictive of participants' accuracy and potentially the degree of utilization of the cued information in the control of spatial attention. These data suggest that the parietal region of both dorsal attention and frontoparietal control systems may transfer behaviorally relevant information during tasks requiring attention and discrimination.

      Seems to suggest that the [[superior parietal lobule]] and the [[inferior parietal lobule]] both become more active when one is trying to determine which rule (and consequent response) is needed (ie, the "bivalent rules").

    5. MT+

      motion-sensitive middle temporal area

    6. Each region in the brain has a unique spatial distribution of functional connectivity. Some regions have functional connectivity that is highly similar. We have referred to those regions as a “system” or “network.” A system in the presently used sense means a set of widely distributed brain regions that exhibit consistently correlated spontaneous activity fluctuations and characteristically respond in concert during conventional, task-related fMRI experiments.

      One way that a [[system]] or [[network]] is defined within [[neuroscience]].

    1. Superior parietal lobule

      In this paper, appears that the [[superior parietal lobule]] has the same network affiliation with the [[dorsal attention network]] regardless if it's in the task or rest state.

    2. In brief, each of the networks comprised peak regions that were isolated in a multivariate spatio-temporal PLS (Krishnan et al., 2011) analysis of three tasks: autobiographical planning, visuospatial planning, and counting. The autobiographical planning task involved primarily internally directed cognition, with participants making personal plans in response to cued goals (e.g. freedom from debt). The visuospatial planning task was the Tower of London, which involves primarily externally directed cognition, as participants determine the minimum number of moves to solve a visual puzzle. The counting task involved the sequential counting of vowels in random letter sequences, a low-demand externally directed task.

      The 3 kinds of tasks used:

      • [[autobiographical planning task]]
      • [[visuospatial planning task]]
      • [[counting task]]
    3. The PCu may be more flexibly engaged in executive control and is observed here to act as a cross-network connector. Among default network nodes, the PCu also demonstrated a relatively high degree of betweenness-centrality, further supporting its role as a network connector (Figure 3).

      The [[precuneus]] might be involved in connecting the [[default mode network]] and the [[frontoparietal control network]]. Notably, in Table 1, the PCu has different network affliliations: C (frontoparietal control) during task and D (default) during rest.

    1. Here we report a patient with a lesion of the superior parietal lobe who shows both sensory and motor deficits consistent with an inability to maintain such an internal representation between updates. Our findings suggest that the superior parietal lobe is critical for sensorimotor integration, by maintaining an internal representation of the body's state. <div class="c-nature-box c-nature-box--side " data-component="entitlement-box"> <div class="js-access-button"> <a href="https://wayf.springernature.com?redirect_uri&#x3D;https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nature.com%2Farticles%2Fnn1098_529" class="c-article__button" data-test="ra21" data-track="click" data-track-action="institution access" data-track-label="button"> <svg class="u-icon" width="18" height="18" aria-hidden="true" focusable="false"><use href="#icon-institution"></use></svg> <span class="c-article__button-text">Access through your institution</span> </a> </div> <div class="js-buy-button"> <a href="#access-options" class="c-article__button c-article__button--inverted" data-test="ra21" data-track="click" data-track-action="buy or subscribe" data-track-label="button"> <span>Buy or subscribe</span> </a> </div> </div>

      Suggests the [[superior parietal lobule]] helps maintain an internal model of the body's state.

      Does this imply that it's a part of the [[default mode network]] when doing this modeling?

    1. Superior parietal damage was reliably associated with deficits on tests involving the manipulation and rearrangement of information in working memory, but not on working memory tests requiring only rehearsal and retrieval processes, nor on tests of long-term memory. These results indicate that superior parietal cortex is critically important for the manipulation of information in working memory.

      Suggests the [[superior parietal lobule]] is important for manipulating info in [[working memory]].

    1. Thus, while our findings suggest FPCN nodes show a relative bias in connectivity toward the DN or DAN, it is important to note that we are not arguing for a precise anatomical demarcation of two FPCN subsystems. A second issue is that our range of tasks was not exhaustive, making it possible that different network interactions could be observed in some contexts (e.g., positive coupling between the FPCNA and DAN). One instance may be perceptual metacognition, which is known to rely on parts of the FPCNA, including the rostrolateral prefrontal cortex (70). Additionally, it is possible that the FPCN may not fractionate, but rather, serve as a domain general resource during demanding tasks that require considerable effort (4). However, our findings do suggest that a FPCN fractionation can be observed in many diverse contexts. Finally, our analysis is limited by the reliance on predefined network boundaries and the assumption of discrete brain clusters/networks. Any brain parcellation is a dimensionality reduction on a complex space and should be viewed as a general guiding principle rather than a set of fixed and precise brain network demarcations. Moreover, the network affiliation of a given brain region can shift across time and context (60, 96). That being said, our results provide evidence that spatially distinct parts of the FPCN—as defined using three different parcellations—are differentially coupled with the DN and DAN across a range of contexts.

      Some limitations worth noting:<br /> - the [[frontoparietal control network]] A & B doesn't give exact boundaries on what anatomical components are used by them - it's possible that there are some tasks weren't considered which switch the correlations (such as A being positively associated with the [[dorsal attention network]]). One possible example might be [[perceptual metacognition]].

    2. Here, we use graph theory and meta-analytic functional profiling to demonstrate that the FPCN is composed of two separate subsystems: FPCNA is connected to the default network and is involved in the regulation of introspective processes, whereas FPCNB is connected to the dorsal attention network and is involved in the regulation of perceptual attention. These findings offer a distinct perspective on the systems-level circuitry underlying cognitive control.

      Suggests the [[frontoparietal control network]] can be subdivided into 2 separate subsystems: - A: which is connected to the [[default mode network]] and involved in regulating introspective processes

      • B: which is connected to the [[dorsal attention network]] and involved in regulating perceptual attention
  6. capture2text.sourceforge.net capture2text.sourceforge.net
    1. Position your mouse pointer at the top-left corner of the text that you want to OCR. Press the OCR hotkey (Windows Key + Q) to begin an OCR capture. Move your mouse to resize the blue capture box over the text that you want to OCR. You may hold down the right mouse button and drag to move the entire capture box. Press the OCR hotkey again (or left-click or press ENTER) to complete the OCR capture. The OCR'd text will be placed in the clipboard and a popup showing the captured text will appear (the popup may be disabled in the settings).

      The instructions on how to use the [[OCR]] tool [[Capture2Text]]. Windows Key + Q

    2. [[Capture2Text]] is a [[OCR]] tool I found when looking for a way to copy text from a screen even though the text isn't selectable (like for screenshots and certain info on Windows). It's also open-source.

  7. medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com
    1. parietal lobule one of two divisions, inferior and superior, of the parietal lobe of the brain.

      [[parietal lobule]]

    1. mass action
      • [ ] Check if formal term
      • [ ] if so, check if Roy is using it differently
    2. the same platform

      Does Roy mean [[ChatGPT]]?

    3. social imaginary
      • [ ] Check if formal term
      • [ ] If so, check if Roy is using it differently
    4. The question is, will CG4 breach the metaphorical dam in our metaphorical beaver pond?

      What is the "dam"?

    5. and there is no cap on the production of “new knowledge.” Whether this knowledge is actually new is in doubt,

      There's a deep irony here.

    6. energetic signature
      • [ ] Check if formal term
      • [ ] If so, check if Roy is using it differently
    7. Note that this theory of action protocols offers an alternative framework to predictive processing.

      Since [[predictive processing]] can be considered a specific application of the [[Active Inference]] research program, it's not clear that Roy's framework of [[action protocols]] is a viable replacement for it. The upshot of [[Active Inference]] is that its formalisms can actually be used to model things and run experiments (with a downside that [[Bayesian networks]] can be computationally demanding). It's currently unclear what the upshot of this [[action protocols]] framework is.

    8. Gibson’s perceptual array

      No search results match [[Gibson's perceptual array]], but it may be related to [[The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems]] by [[James Gibson]]. Also, the term "perceptual array" doesn't appear anywhere in that book or on Gibson's wiki. He seems to have done research on [[optic arrays]].

    9. In other words, the eye of the fish is not its organ of perception. Rather its organ of perception extends into the sea itself.

      Appears inconsistent with [[James Gibson]]'s use of [[organ of sensitivity]] and [[organ of perception]] in [[The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems]]:

      Here and throughout this book, "receptor" will be used only for the immobile parts of the input system and the word "organ" will be used for the mobile parts. (p. 40)

      --

      • ORGANS. An organ of sensitivity is a structure containing many energy receptors and many receptive units that can adjust so as to modify the input from cells and units. An organ must therefore have muscles, and they must be supplied with efferent fibers from the central nervous system. The afferent and efferent fibers, incoming and outgoing, may be gathered in a single bundle, a nerve, like the nerve from each eye, or they may be distributed in many bundles, like the fibers from the skin. The so-called sensory nerves are anatomical expedients; there is not a specific nerve for each sense despite a popular idea to the contrary. (p. 41)

      --

      The organs of sensitivity, like other organs of the body, exist in a hierarchy of organization. Lower organs are subordinated to higher. Smaller structures serve larger structures, and they overlap. The eyeball is "all of a piece," but it is an unusual sense organ. The ear, the functional auditory organ, is not a single piece of tissue, and the organ of touch is dispersed over the whole body. The receptive and the adjustive parts of an organ need not be in the same place. The olfactory organ that we call the nose, that is, the functional nose, has its receptive part deep in the facial bones but its motor part in the chest muscles for breathing and sniffing. The receptive and the adjustive part can only be understood in relation to one another. (p. 42)

      --

      When we stubbornly continue to mean by taste a mode of attention that cuts across the classification of receptors we are only recognizing the fact that receptors may be functionally united when anatomically separated. In fact, the word palate, although used in anatomy to mean the back of the mouth, is used in gastronomy to mean the whole complex of receptors contributing to palatability, that is, an organ of perception. (p. 137)

    10. It can be argued that language is the primary environment in which the human animal swims.

      Prima facie, seems dubious "that language is the primary environment", but it's not clear what Roy means by "primary".

    11. potential state

      If there's a "[[potential state]]", then what's its opposite? The "actual state" or "kinetic state"?

    12. we can say that the potential state of the society as a whole “ingresses” into the individual as their subjectivity. This is how the individual is internally related to society. On the other hand, the actions that individual take (including speech acts and other communicative technologies) shape the potential state of the society, constituting the individual’s external relations to it.

      Important to note that Roy seems to be using [[internal relations]] and [[external relations]] to both refer to the agent relationship to it's environment. With this example, the subjectivity of the individual (which came from society as a whole) seems to be their "internal relations", and the individual's actions taken seems to be there "external relations".

      Perhaps there's something important about the [[potential state]] and how it relates the agent & environment?

    13. ingresses

      From Merriam-Webster's dictionary

      1: the act of entering : ENTRANCE

      the seal prevents ingress of moisture

      2: the power or liberty of entrance or access

      an area with restricted ingress

    14. Before going further, we have to understand another key feature about the theory of action protocols. Action protocols generate both internal and external relations, simultaneously.

      Reminds me of [[Active Inference]] using the notion of a [[Markov blanket]] which has [[internal states]] (agent of interest) and [[external states]] (environment of agent) which are mediated by [[sensory states]] (feedback) and [[active states]] (actions). The research program of [[Active Inference]] also claims the same kind of [[scale invariance]] and cross category applications that Roy seems to be doing with her notion [[action protocol]].

      Currently, Roy's approach seems more ambiguous and less usable in scientific research than the approach of [[Active Inference]].

    15. we can think of finance capitalism as the action protocol that governs most of the procedures that are associated with the movement of natural resources in and out of various input-throughput systems around the world.

      What are the actions/procedures?

      What is the protocol/code?

    16. Democracy can be viewed as an action protocol in a similar way.

      What are the actions/procedures?

      What is the protocol/code?

    17. finance capitalism
      • [ ] Check if [[finance capitalism]] is a formal term
      • [ ] If so, check if [[Bonnitta Roy]] is using it differently
    18. individual agents as well as compound agents

      Roy seems to be making a distinction here between [[individual agents]] and [[compound agents]], but this isn't clearly addressed in the footnote.

    19. compound agent navigates its own intentional space through protocols and passes those down to trigger procedures at the lower (individual member) level

      Roy's notion of [[compound agent]] might be what Vervaeke's notion of [[agent]] is. If so, this may lead to some confusion due to a [[mapping error]].

    20. A compound agent is sometimes referred to as a hypersubject in the frame of hyperbojects, or, as Whitehead proposed, a supersubject.

      This is an interesting comparison to [[hypersubject]] within the frame of [[hyperobjects]].

    21. collective agency is an emergent outcome of the self-organized actions of many individuals

      Seems like [[collective agency]] (for Roy) is a kind of [[agency]] as an [[epiphenomena]]. This seems inconsistent with the notion that [[agency]] is the capacity for the agent (at whatever scale) is the most causally relevant factor in determining it's behavior (think this is Vervaeke's view).

      • [ ] Need to look up how [[Michael Levin]] and [[John Vervaeke]] use it
    22. individual agency

      The later passages make me think she's using "individual agency" as synonymous with "compound agency".

    23. Zooming in this way, at a certain threshold I find myself reticent to assign individual agency.

      I'm confused by this reticence which makes me think she's using "agency" to mean something related to consciousness/subjective experiences. This kind of agency seems inconsistent with the way it's used by [[John Vervaeke]] and [[Michael Levin]].

    24. This shows that the term “action protocol” can integrate across different epistemological domains.

      What does "integrate across different epistemological domains" mean?

    25. integrate

      Does this integration provide any insight? If so, what is it?

    26. different epistemological domains.

      What are the different epistemological domains? Guess 1: empirical science vs. maths & logics

    27. This shows that the term “action protocol” is useful at any scale and across categories of reality.

      This seems false; the example Roy gave only suggests the term [[action protocol]] might be a helpful framing at different scales and across categories.

      Also, something is only "useful" in a particular context (which may change the goals & values at play in determining something's usefulness).

    28. First, an action protocol is part “code” — the protocol piece, and part “procedure” — the action piece. The protocol-code that I write into the software triggers a sequence of procedures in the electronic device. When I knit a wool sweater with a cable design, or use a loom to make a carpet, I am employing both protocols and actions.

      I'm confused by the use of "protocol". Roy may be equivocating here.

      • Code part is "protocol"

      • Procedure part is "action"

    1. A resource on the different [[mantras]] used in [[transcendental meditation]].

      Seems like the mantras in this [[meditation]] are internally repeated in one's mind, but this may not work for people who only think in images. Maybe something like [[Om/Aum chanting]] would be a more accessible [[mantra recitation meditation]]?

    1. A helpful website that has the feature of seeing 4 side by side translations of the [[Tao Te Ching]].

    1. Notably, it is also likely that additional levels of complexity and network interactions exist at faster time-scales. While fMRI functional connectivity is not ideally suited to measuring cognitively-relevant interactions at fast time-scales (see (Laumann, et al., 2016; Liegeois, Laumann, Snyder, Zhou, & Yeo, 2017) on issues with measuring faster dynamics in resting-state FC), exciting future work using other techniques such as ERP, EEG, and fast optical imaging may shed light on faster dynamics within these networks. In this domain, we refer the reader to other works in this special issue on “Cognitive Control” ((Gratton, 2018; Gratton, Cooper, Fabiani, Carter, & Karayanidis, 2018), see also (Baniqued, Low, Fletcher, Gratton, & Fabiani, 2017; Barcelo & Cooper, 2017; Boudewyn & Carter, 2017; Coleman, Watson, & Strayer, 2017; Wessel, 2017).

      fMRI [[functional connectivity]] isn't appropriate for fast time-scales

    2. Control Networks and HubsC. Gratton,1 H. Sun,2 and S. E. Petersen1,3,4,5,6,7

      A good paper that helps explain the confusion behind overlapping terminology for different networks in the brain and whether or not there's evidence to support making distinctions.

    3. In the meantime, however, we suggest that it is safest to assume that “cinguloopercular” or “salience” definitions are somewhat ambiguous in the literature unless a special effort has been made to distinguish the two.

      The [[cinguloopercular network]] and [[salience network]] might be the same thing in the neuroscience research literature (unless the given authors suggest otherwise).

    4. evidence from resting state functional connectivity (rs-FC) studies suggest that these control regions are decomposable into (at least) two relatively separate networks: the cinguloopercular (CO) and frontoparietal (FP) networks ((Dosenbach, et al., 2007); although we do no focus on them here, in addition to the CO and FP networks, the salience (Seeley, et al., 2007), and dorsal and ventral attention networks (Corbetta & Shulman, 2002) may be considered additional members of this group of control networks; see Box 1 for a description of network nomenclature).

      Suggests at least 2 (relatively) separate control networks: the [[cinguloopercular network]] and the [[frontoparietal network]].

    5. However, data-driven approaches to whole-brain network definitions do sometimes identify two separate networks: e.g., a more dorsal “CO” network and a more ventral/rostral “salience” network in the anterior insula and medial frontal cortex ((Power, et al., 2011); see Figure 2A). Indeed, a detailed examination of the functional connectivity of the anterior insula reveals that the region may be a convergence zone for multiple different networks with different patterns of functional connectivity and task activations (Nelson, et al., 2010). Furthermore, histology of different anatomical divisions of the insula may also support a division between the CO and salience networks, as more ventral regions of the anterior insula and medial frontal cortex contain von Economo neurons, neurons with large, fast conducting axons that are enriched in hominids and have been linked to self-awareness and affective functions (Seeley, et al., 2012).

      Some evidence that supports drawing a distinction between the [[salience network]] and the [[cinguloopercular network]].

    6. histology

      The term [[histology]] just refers to microscopic anatomy.

    7. note that the ‘cinguloopercular’ network is also sometimes referred to as the ‘cingulo-insular’ network (Sadaghiani, et al., 2010)

      The [[cinguloopercular network]] is also called the [[cingulo-insular network]].

    8. CO

      [[cinguloopercular network]]

    1. Interactivity Fosters Bayesian Reasoning Without Instruction

      A fascinating paper on how students can solve conditional probabilistic problems much easier when given a deck of cards that they can physically manipulate. A good example of the [[distributed cognition]] framework being applied and yielding positive results.

    1. Regions in this study showing differences between groups and correlations with hours of practice overlapped with regions showing abnormal structural and functional variation in persons with attention deficit disorders. For example, compared with normal controls, individuals with attention deficit disorders have shown activation differences in the sustained attention network (40), regions involved in response inhibition (22, 40–42), and reduction in size of prefrontal cortex and cerebellum (43). In addition, it is plausible from our results that meditation may strengthen the ability to inhibit cognitive and emotional mental processes such as rumination that can lead to or exacerbate stress, anxiety, or depression (44).

      Suggests that [[ADHD]] may benefit from [[meditation]], which was focusing on single object (including breath) while monitoring mental state for sleepiness and mental chatter.

    1. The default mode network (DMN) is part of the brain structure that shows higher neural activity and energy consumption when one is at rest (Raichle et al., 2001). The DMN comprises the posterior cingulate cortex/precuneus (PCC), medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC), bilateral inferior parietal lobule (IPL), and other regions including inferior temporal gyrus. These key regions of the DMN are highly interconnected as conveyed by both white matter fiber tracing (van den Heuvel et al., 2008, 2009; Greicius et al., 2009) and functional synchrony of resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) signals (Greicius et al., 2003; Biswal et al., 2010).

      Outlines the main parts of the [[default mode network]] as: - [[posterior cingulate cortex]]/[[precuneus]] - [[medial prefrontal cortex]] - [[bilateral inferior parietal lobule]] - and other regions including [[inferior temporal gyrus]]

    1. Another recent study using analysis of intrinsic func-tional correlations showed that the default network cor-relations were weaker in ASD (Cherkassky et al. 2006).Of note, the individuals with ASD showed differencesin a fronto-parietal network that has been recently hy-pothesized to control interactions between the defaultnetwork and brain systems linked to external atten-tion (Vincent et al. 2007b). These data in ASD suggestan interesting possibility: the default network may belargely intact in ASD but under utilized perhaps be-cause of a dysfunction in control systems that regulateits use.

      The [[default mode network]] might be mostly fine in [[autism]] but under used.

    2. An intriguing possibil-ity suggested by the authors of the study and extendedby Iacoboni (2006) is that the failure to modulate thedefault network in ASD is driven by differential cog-nitive mentation during rest, specifically a lack of self-referential processing.

      Wonder if the "lack of self-referential processing" would imply a weaker sense of self/ego? Or maybe it's more related to the lack of internal (particularly bodily and emotional) awareness?

    3. A further consistent ob-servation has been that the amygdala is increased involume in children with ASD (e.g., Abell et al. 1999,Schumann et al. 2004), perhaps as a reflection of ab-normal regulation of brain growth (Courchesne et al.2001). While not discussed earlier because of our focuson cortical regions, the amygdala is known to con-tribute to social cognition (Brothers 1990, Adolphs2001, Phelps 2006) and interacts with regions withinthe default network. The amygdala has extensive pro-jections to orbital frontal cortex (OFC) and vMPFC(Carmichael & Price 1995).

      Increased volume of the [[amygdala]] in children with [[autism]]. Also, the amygdala is involved in [[social cognition]].

    4. Developmental disruption of the default network,in particular disruption linked to the MPFC, mightresult in a mind that is environmentally focused andabsent a conception of other people’s thoughts. Theinability to interact with others in social contextswould be an expected behavioral consequence. Itis important to also note that such disruptions, ifidentified, may not be linked to the originating de-velopmental events that cause ASD but rather re-flect a developmental endpoint. That is, dysfunc-tion of the default network and associated symp-toms may emerge as an indirect consequence ofearly developmental events that begin outside thenetwork.

      In other words, it could be the case that either:

      \(\text{disrupting MPFC (within the DMN)} \implies \text{ASD} \)

      or

      \( \text{mystery events } E \text{ outside the DMN happen} \implies \text{messed up DMN (and ASD)}\)

    1. Minimal phenomenal experience: Meditation, tonic alertness, and the phenomenology of “pure” consciousness Articles https://doi.org/10.33735/phimisci.2020.I.46 Published 2020-03-24 Thomas Metzinger

      A paper I found helpful in trying to figure out if there is a distinction between a [[pure consciousness event]] and [[nonduality]]. Has some helpful case studies of people giving verbal descriptions of what their meditative state feels like.

    1. Willoughby Britton

      A researcher that was mentioned during a conversation between [[Sam Harris]] and [[Loch Kelly]] in the [[Waking Up app]]. Britton was mentioned in a section titled "Destabilizing Experiences". Kelly said that [[WIlloughby Britton]] has done research on the [[dark night of the soul]] that can occur in the [[vipassana tradition]]. In this context, this is a period where (according to Kelly)

      about 30-50% of people who go on a 5 day retreat will experience some level of panic or flooding of the unconscious when they experience their first no-self experience.

    1. Chesterton's fence (uncountable) (public policy) The principle that reforms should not be made until the reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood.

      A notion mentioned by [[Daniel Schmachtenberger]] during his interview with [[Curt Jaimungal]].

    1. TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic HumanFalsehoods

      A paper linked in The Waluigi Effect (mega-post). It was referenced to justify [[Cleo Nardo]]'s claim that,

      the better the [large language] model, the more likely it is to repeat common misconceptions.

    1. LEARN GENERATIVE AIShort Courses

      Seem like the same short course with [[Andrew Ng]] from a different page.

    1. DeepLearning.AI Short Courses

      Some short courses by [[Andrew Ng]]. Some (maybe all) are in collaboration with [[OpenAI]].

    1. Mirroring earlier evidence that functionally and anatomically dissociable dorsal attention and frontoparietal control networks interact as a functional network under specific task conditions (i.e., externally directed cognition), these more recent reports provide strong evidence for interactivity among default and frontoparietal control regions during internally directed cognition4. This emerging picture of dynamic interactivity among these three networks calls into question the orthodoxy of labeling functional brain networks as either TPN or TNN. These labels are more likely the byproduct of the desire for rigorously controlled experimental designs (i.e., externally directed stimuli) than meaningful descriptors of functional brain networks. However, research delineating and characterizing a taxonomy of neurocognitive networks is ongoing (e.g., Laird et al., 2011; Yeo et al., 2011). Indeed, the frontoparietal control network may be further fractionated into dissociable “salience” and “executive-control” networks (Seeley et al., 2007). Growing evidence for a complex and dynamically interacting network architecture highlight the importance of developing a stable nomenclature for functional brain networks. This will be an important consideration for future research.

      Further questions the norm of calling functional brain networks either TPN or TNN.

      Also, suggests that the [[frontoparietal control network]] could be subdivided into a [[salience network]] and an [[executive-control network]]. Reminds me of [[Lisa Feldman Barrett]]'s discussion with [[Scott Barry Kaufman]] where she said something like, "Neuroscientists tend to name parts of the brain after the specific activity they happen to be interested in." She said that the [[dorsal attention network]] was one of the regions with the most names.

    2. The value of the “TPN vs. TNN” nomenclature has been further eroded by observations that these two putatively opposed networks can be simultaneously engaged. Specifically, the default network may be co-active, and functionally coupled, with the frontoparietal control network under certain task conditions. This evidence emerges from studies of autobiographical planning, simulated problem-solving, evaluating one's creative work, mind-wandering, social working memory, and scene construction (Spreng et al., 2010; Summerfield et al., 2010; Gerlach et al., 2011; Ellamil et al., 2012; Meyer et al., 2012). I recently investigated interactions between purported “task-positive” and “task-negative” brain regions using two planning paradigms: visuospatial planning, as assessed by the well-established Tower of London task, and autobiographical planning, as assessed by a novel task that required participants to devise personal plans in order to meet specific goals (Spreng et al., 2010). For example, “freedom from debt” constituted one of the goals in the autobiographical planning task. Participants viewed the goal and then saw two steps they could take toward achieving that goal (“good job” and “save money”) as well as an obstacle they needed to overcome in order to achieve the goal (“have fun”). They were instructed to integrate the steps and obstacles into a cohesive personal plan that would allow them to achieve the goal. Autobiographical planning, similar to imagining personal future events (e.g., Addis et al., 2007), engaged the default network (Figure ​(Figure1B).1B). Visuospatial planning engaged the dorsal attention network (Figure ​(Figure1C).1C). Critically, both planning tasks engaged the frontoparietal control network (Figure ​(Figure1D).1D). Task-related functional connectivity analyses indicated that the frontoparietal control network dynamically coupled with the default network during autobiographical planning and with the dorsal attention network during visuospatial planning (Figure ​(Figure1E).1E). By demonstrating that the frontoparietal control network is actively engaged by two tasks that differentially rely upon either the default or dorsal attention network, we provided novel evidence that the frontoparietal control network may flexibly gain access to information processed in either domain (for a replication and additional data with older adults, see Spreng and Schacter, in press).

      Gives a concrete example of when the so-called TPN (ie, [[dorsal attention network]]) and TNN (ie, [[default mode network]]) are both engaged. In this case, there were 2 planning paradigms used: - visuospatial planning (assessed by the [[Tower of London task]]) - autobiographical planning (assessed by task of asking people to make personal plans to achieve certain goals)

      The visuospatial planning activated the [[dorsal attention network]], and the autobiographical planning activated the [[default mode network]]. What's interesting is that both tasks activated the [[frontoparietal control network]].

    3. Moreover, default network activity is associated with many active cognitive processes that are internally focused, such as stimulus-independent thoughts or “mind-wandering” (McGuire et al., 1996; Mason et al., 2007; Christoff et al., 2009), self-reference (Gusnard et al., 2001; D'Argembeau et al., 2005) recollecting one's past or imagining one's personal future (Andreasen et al., 1995; Schacter et al., 2007; Spreng et al., 2009), scene construction (Hassabis and Maguire, 2007; Hassabis et al., 2007), social cognition (Iacoboni et al., 2004; Spreng et al., 2009; Spreng and Grady, 2010; Mar, 2011; Andrews-Hanna, in press), narrative comprehension (Mar, 2011), forming associations (Bar et al., 2007), and semantic memory (Binder et al., 2009). While many of these cognitive processes are stimulus-independent, spontaneous, and unconstrained, it is inaccurate to characterize them as “task-negative.”

      Things the [[default mode network]] is involved in: - mind-wandering (ie, stimulus-independent thoughts) - self-reference - recalling one's past or imagining one's personal future - scene consctruction - social cognition - narrative comprehension - forming associations - sematic memory

    4. The Fallacy of a “Task-Negative” NetworkR. Nathan Spreng1,*R. Nathan Spreng1Laboratory of Brain and Cognition, Department of Human Development, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USAFind articles by R. Nathan Spreng

      A good paper that critiques calling the [[default mode network]] the "task-negative" network since it's involved in some specific cognitive tasks.

    1. John Vervaeke describes relevance realisation

      A small [[YouTube]] video clip of [[John Vervaeke]] discussing his model of [[relevance realization]].

    1. Causal Emergence in Discrete & Continuous DynamicalSystemsThomas F. Varley 1,2March 31, 2020

      I found this paper while looking for ways that [[Eric Hoel]]'s work on a formal structure (via [[information theory]]) for detecting when higher level, lower resolution views would actually provide more [[information]]. I recall being somewhat disappointed by the application to [[cellular automata]] in [[John Conway]]'s [[Game of Life]] since the rules that result in (what appears to us as) emergent complex structures didn't actually map onto the results of applying Hoel's formalism.

    1. Found this while looking for gamified ways to teach people how to spot/identify bias.

      Seems to be primarily targeted toward educators. Checkology does routine maintenance during July to delete all student accounts, and I was unable to create an account to see what this is like.

    1. A website I found while trying to look for gamified ways for people to learn how to spot/identify bias.

    1. This was a tool mentioned by [[Grant Sanderson]] in the description of a video on [[divergence]] and [[curl]]. Helpful tool for visualizing [[vector fields]].

    1. Model safety issues do not fit well within a bug bounty program, as they are not individual, discrete bugs that can be directly fixed. Addressing these issues often involves substantial research and a broader approach. To ensure that these concerns are properly addressed, please report them using the appropriate form, rather than submitting them through the bug bounty program. Reporting them in the right place allows our researchers to use these reports to improve the model. Issues related to the content of model prompts and responses are strictly out of scope, and will not be rewarded unless they have an additional directly verifiable security impact on an in-scope service (described below). Examples of safety issues which are out of scope: Jailbreaks/Safety Bypasses (e.g. DAN and related prompts) Getting the model to say bad things to you Getting the model to tell you how to do bad things Getting the model to write malicious code for you Model Hallucinations are also out of scope: Getting the model to pretend to do bad things Getting the model to pretend to give you answers to secrets Getting the model to pretend to be a computer and execute code None of these issues may be reported through bugcrowd. None of these issues will receive a monetary reward. For model related issues, please report them here: https://openai.com/form/model-behavior-feedback

      I was mistaken about [[OpenAI]]'s bug bounty program; it does not cover jailbreaks or hallucinations.

    2. It looks like [[OpenAI]] has a bug bounty program. Better incentive to report bugs, vulnerabilities, exploits, etc. than just going through their other process.

      Update: Incorrect, model performance issues are out of scope. Confer annotation on this webpage.

  8. Jun 2023
    1. This is a page I found while trying to learn the syntax of Dataview (an Obsidian plugin that allows database queries on one's own vault).

    1. As opposed to MathOverflow.net, Math SE is

      Q&A site for people studying math at any level & professionals in related fields source

      I learned this from this answer on the Math.Meta.SE site

    1. Error opening file for writing: mpv.exe Anki Desktop

      Ran into the same issue when reinstalling Anki. The solution was (as dae suggested) to use Task Manager to close mpv under "Background processes".

      Afterwards, the Anki Setup program ran without issue.

    1. Found this webpage for a 3D brain model when someone (maybe frymatic?) mentioned a region of the brain I was having trouble imagining.

    1. An article recommended to me by Dalton V. that he thought I'd enjoy and appreciate. Looks like AlignmentForum is one of those "online Rationalist communities" (like LessWrong, SlateStarCodex, etc.).

      The blog post "The Waluigi Effect" by Cleo Nardo touches on a variety of interesting topics:

      • the Waluigi effect
      • Simulator Theory
      • Derrida's "there is no outside text"
      • RLHF (Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback) and potential limits
  9. May 2023
    1. Related to this note:

      Haris Neophytou wants to apply a "primality sieve" (namely the sieve of Eratosthenes) to this list. I think it's so he can construct the primes that divide the order of the monster group \(M\)

    1. Trying to follow an argument given here: https://youtu.be/mFZs7uGwNBo?t=3413

      The sequence A002267 is claimed by Haris Neophytou to be the 1st 15 "super singular prime numbers" (ie, the primes that divides the order of the Monster Group). The order is the number of elements in the group.

      Note that the last 3 elements [47, 59, 71] multiply to give the number of dimensions in which the Monster group exists: 196,883.

      Neophytou believes A002267 gives a different way of looking at the monster group \(M\).

      Around 1:02:45, Neophytou says he'll start from A002822...

      (a list of numbers, \(m\text{,}\) such that \(6m - 1\) and \(6m + 1\) are twin primes)

      ... and construct "the minimal order of the monster" (what?)

  10. Jan 2023
    1. This was recommended in the Obsidian Members Group Discord for teaching someone how to setup an Obsidian vault with a GitHub repo for version control. Kamil claimed it was more clear than an intro article by [[Bryan Jenks]] on how to setup GitHub with Obsidian. Jenks eventually made a video about the process.

    1. I came here looking for the glycemic index for bananas to see if this might explain a friends delayed reaction to consuming high amounts of salicylate. That is, the pain they experienced as a burn in the mouth/tongue only occurred after consuming a banana. A prior search tentatively suggested that spikes in insulin (which occur with foods high in glycemic index and glycemic load) can cause inflammation to the affected region which sends white blood cells as a response and can cause swelling and increased sensitivity to pain.