Staff List

English / Japanese

Research Interests:

In general: Dynamical wholeness What is wholeness? We generally evaluate the notion of parts and whole in science. Such a notion sounds like something misleading. In starting from the notion of parts and whole, it looks as if we could comprehend the concept of wholeness. A concept is generally defined as the equivalence between Intent and Extent. For example, a concept of even numbers is: 2n, where n is a natural number (intent) if and only if 0,2,4,…(extent). Intent and extent can correspond to attributes and objects, respectively. Focus on the concept of wholeness. A whole consists of parts. That is a kind of intent. However, what is extent of wholeness? If you indicate a particular object as the extent of wholeness, it is nothing but a part in a universe. Once it is indicated, and that appears as an object, it is accompanied with a universe and/or background in which an object holds as an object. If you define an object as the extent of wholeness, you always generate another "wholeness". Wholeness must be a unique, in which parts exists. That is why, we cannot prescribe the extent of wholeness. We cannot comprehend the notion of wholeness as a concept. In spite of such a difficulty, we use the concept of wholeness, in terms of both linguistic and mathematical tools. For example, the extent of wholeness (or a universe) is defined as a particular distribution of thermal perturbation and/or randomness. We have to focus on a kind of discrepancies between intent and extent of wholeness. In so far as we cannot prescribe the extent of wholeness, the definition of the extent of wholeness is destined to be local and temporal. It does not mean there exists a particular dynamics of wholeness. If one defines a particular dynamics, the direction past to future is defined. The change from a particular universe to another can be described. However, the aspect of which another universe is hidden and is always accompanied (in other words, the future is hidden in the present) is not expressed. Dynamical wholeness has to be implemented by focusing on that aspect.

Internal measurement/endo-physics (formal approach) The essential feature of the endo-perspective is examined, and a formal model of the endo-perspective is proposed by introducing the mixture of intra- and inter-operations. Because such a mixture in its naive realization entails a paradox within a formal system, we weaken the inter-operation in order to allow the formal system to be endowed with that mixture without a contradiction. The weakened inter-operation is related to the infomorphism proposed by Barwise. The formal model of the endo-perspective is thereby expressed as the dynamic infomorphism driven by that mixture. The endo-perspective is described as a formal system that includes the outside of the occupied perspective. If such an inclusion is applied to the common definition of a set, it entails Russel's paradox. Retaining the outside can be expressed as the mixture of the intent and the extent of a set together with the mixture of intra-operations within the intent (or extent) and inter-operations between intent and extent. The endo-perspective, therefore, consists of two subsystems corresponding to the intent and the extent, respectively, and is defined as a system involving a particular mathematical tool (i.e., infomorphism) that allows for retaining the outside without a contradiction. Within that framework, the mixture of the intra- and the inter-operation drives the dynamical transition of the system, however, it can be terminated by its collapse. This collapse can be predicted from the internal logic defined within the system. The model is constructed through the verification of "a weakened paradox". Because the definition of the system involves a weakened paradox only, it does not always lead to a contradiction, although the collapse of the system corresponds to a contradiction. The double standards can be embedded into the system, the domain with truth-values (the inside) and the domain in which the collapse of the logic can occur (the outside).

Biologically motivated computing (slime-mold computing) Although there are many attempts (local non-linear dynamics, DNA-based, protein-based and amorphous computing) for emergent computing based on biological molecular devices, the notion of emergent computing is still ambiguous. Emergence and an error are both sides of the same coin. Biologically based computer could be an instable machine, while it has the potential for emergent computing. Clearly, not an error but an emergent computing is based on the relationship of trust between a user and a machine. To manifest that aspect we implement Boolean gate as a biological device made of slime mold. Here we show that Boolean gate of slime works properly, and that the relationship of trust can be replaced by a robust logical gate computing values against internal failure. Slime gate can be hopeful device for emergent computing. The emergent computation is theoretically defined by the global coherence generated from local interactions, while that coherence cannot be predicted locally. It needs discrepancies between local and global mechanism. To introduce those discrepancies we use a living true slime mold, Physarum polycephalum as a computing device. Compared with DNA and/or proteins used in computing that are non-living things, living slime mold has living wholeness that cannot be predicted locally. That is why discrepancies between local interactions and living unity as a whole can be employed to emergent computing.

Cognitive Systems / Consciousness Psychologists previously proposed introspection: The perception of a red apple is based on a label of the red apple. Such an idea falls into infinite regression and/or a self-reference because it leads to the mixture of a label and referring to a label. In spite of the collapse of the introspectionism, the notion of qualia is recently proposed, and it brings us another concept different from types. On one hand, introspection was prescribed as a kind of types. That is why it is a particular abstract expression and/or ideal form, and then it is destined to be self-reference. On the other hand, qualia appear, in the science of consciousness, as tokens, individual things, what exist in a universe in their own rights. Brain scientists and philosophers of consciousness claim that brain computes or constructs not types but tokens that are qualia. If one separates real universe from formal universe, or description from what is to be described, he is destined to take after the difficulty resulting from the discrepancies between real things and introspection. He has to claim that real things (tokens) cannot be described or cannot be expressed as types. That is why proposal of qualia has a new significance against introspection. Therefore, the qualia are destined to be hard-problems. We have to focus on the co-existence of types-computation and tokens-computation. It is easy to see that type-computation in a machine must be accompanied with materialistic phenomena (i.e., tokens-computation) as electric flow, adequate temperature and so on. Especially in a brain, type-computation (a particular computation in a particular area of a brain) is carried out with token-computation (surrounding activities in and out of a brain). There is no static duality between types- and tokens-computations. Even if one attempts to describe consistent model consisting of types and tokens-computations, tokens-computation must be cut off with a finite domain. As a result, computation co-existing with its own environment by which a computation is carried out must be expressed as dynamical duality enhanced in phenomenal computing. That is a key concept breaking through the notion of hard-problems in the science of consciousness. In our lab, cognitive experiments and models in which consciousness are grasped as dynamical duality between types- and tokens- computations are conducted and proposed.

Recent Publications:

1. Gunji, Y.-P., Takahashi, T. and Aono, M.,(2004). Dynamical infomorphism: form of endo-perspective. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 22, 1077-1101.
2. Gunji, Y.-P. and Kamiura, M. (2004). Observational heterarchy enhancing active coupling. Physica D 198, 74-105.
3. Haruna, T. and Y.-P. Gunji (2005). Autonomous indefiniteness versus external indefiniteness: theory of weak topped ∩-structure and its application to elementary local cellular automaton. Physica D 202, 71-94.
4. Gunji, Y.-P., T. Haruna, T. Shirakawa and K. Sonoda, 2005,Open limit: A wholeness with vagueness driving ver-handlung. In: Endo-Physics, Time, Quantum and Subjectives (Buccheri, R., A.C.Elitzur & M. Saniga eds., World Scientific)pp. 57-72.
5. Gunji, Y.-P. Miyoshi, H. Takahashi, T. and Kamiura, M. (2006). Dynamical duality of type- and token-computation as an abstract brain. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 27,1187-1204.
6. M. Kamiura and Y.-P. Gunji (2006) Robust and Ubiquitous on-off intermittency in active coupling. Physica D 218:122-130.
7. Gunji, Y.-P. Haruna, T. and Sawa, K. (2006). Principles of Biological organization: Local-global negotiation based on “Material cause”. Physica D 219:152-167.

Partial List of Professional Service:

• Member, Biophysical Society of Japan
• Member,Japan Ethological Society
• Member, Japan Society of Cognitive Science
• Member, The Palaeontological Society of Japan
• Member,Seismological Society of Japan
• Member,International Society for Molecular Electronics and Biocomputing

updated date: 1/ 4/2012