| Annotation Metadata
|
^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"W4k8n50np7","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ10Ӻ","startOffset":504,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ10Ӻ","endOffset":1438°Ӻ,"quote":"The first is an hierarchical arrangement of feedback loops, such that the reference value of one loop can be set and changed by the effector function of another. Systems of that kind have been described by DuBrulӶ17Ӻ, AshbyӶ18Ӻ, McKayӶ19Ӻ, and recently in great detail by PowersӶ20Ӻ. The technical intricacies do not concern us here. The important point is that a system of that kind, if it is equipped with some sort of memory that records “disturbances” (sensory signals that do not match the reference value), “activities” (effector functions), and such “perceptual” changes (sensory functions) as occur within a specified space of time after an activity, then it can begin to optimize reactions to disturbances on the basis of what-has-followed-what in the past. At that stage, the system, in fact, has already the basic components that are required for “learning” or, as Maturana would say, to operate as an inductive system.Ӷ21Ӻ","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321084609571877238732":^°°,^"jQuery321084609571877238732":^°°,^"jQuery321084609571877238732":^°°,^"jQuery321084609571877238732":^°°,^"jQuery321084609571877238732":^°°,^"jQuery321084609571877238732":^°°,^"jQuery321084609571877238732":^°°,^"jQuery321084609571877238732":^°°,^"jQuery321084609571877238732":^°°,^"jQuery321084609571877238732":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","order":"mw-content-text","category":"WissenschaftlicheReferenz2","data_creacio":1567707903599°
|
