Concepts and paradigms

This manifesto will deal with loosely-defined concepts nested in objective terms such as ‘robot’, ‘machine’, ‘autonomous’, ‘synthetic creature’ and the like to describe heretofore abstractly realized phenomenon that which comes so easily for us to recognize when we see it. It is one of the goals of this document to establish a set of terms suitable and narrowly defined to carry specific and targeted meaning of the abstract concepts that will be introduced and explored herein. The terms used widely throughout this thesis are:

Feature: the prominent part or characteristic embedded in both physical and abstract components.

Entity: a dynamic object that possesses behaviour forming an commonly-identifiable form.

Robot: I will use this term interchangeably with ‘machine’, ‘autonomous entity’, and ‘synthetic creature’ meaning a composite artificial life form who may or may not bear resemblance to a humanoid form. I do not use it in its original context or in its exact translation.

Controller: an entity that insists on particular machine states based on an external criteria or paradigm.

Orchestration: Cooperation between disparate physical or abstract elements resulting in finely-grained coordination.

Autonomy: A system defined by its own behaviour derived from experience.

I employ the terms ’life’ and ’living’ loosely throughout this manifesto. I will use the terms to mean “any system constructed or natural that interacts directly with a human observer generating interest”. Granted the definition is limited and perhaps flawed, it is for the conclusion of the research that this will be rectified. For now, I don’t want to be mired in the metaphysical aspects while just beginning the work, hence the abbreviation here.

Leave a Reply