364 lines
23 KiB
Markdown
364 lines
23 KiB
Markdown
## Da aggiungere
|
|
- intricazione
|
|
- top-down
|
|
- eterarchia
|
|
- questo tipo logica non ha un corrispettivo nella programmazione tradizionale.Perche' questa si ispira al nostro ragionando che e' unico. Ragionare su una logica unificante nella programmazione tradizionale non ha senso, perche' non c'e' una logica unica, ma una per ciascun programma
|
|
- in G esprimiamo la possibilità di eventi con RF che da la possibilità relativa. in enliving le possibilità diventano attualità. a quel punto possiamo interpretare temporaneamente le relative attializzazioni, perche abbiamo imposto la matrice spazio temporale.
|
|
- il fatto che possiamo far girare lenliving su un hardware piu o meno veloce, se manteniamo la relatività fra possibilità di eventi, non cambia nulla alle attualità. quello xhe cambia è la velocita di scorrimento del tempo, non le seqyenze di eventi.
|
|
|
|
# Logic Principles of the Tripartite Synapse Model
|
|
|
|
These are the principles that govern the system's logic — not the syntax in which it is
|
|
expressed, but the reasoning that shapes every variable, every behavior, and every
|
|
transition. They are organized into ten categories, from the most foundational to the
|
|
most emergent. The final category shows how principles that are stated entirely in local
|
|
terms necessarily produce a holistic system — a whole that no part represents but that
|
|
every part participates in.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## I. Resource and Conservation
|
|
|
|
**Nothing is free.** Every behavior consumes a resource. There is no operation in the
|
|
system that does not draw something down. This is not a constraint added on top of the
|
|
logic — it is the foundation. Selectivity, competition, and forgetting all emerge from
|
|
the single fact that resources are finite.
|
|
|
|
**Resources are redistributed, not created.** The total pool is bounded by an external
|
|
ceiling. Within it, the system only moves resources around — from one synapse to another,
|
|
from a dismantled structure back into the pool. No internal process manufactures capacity;
|
|
it only reallocates. Learning is therefore always at the expense of something else.
|
|
|
|
**Two distinct resources, two distinct conservation laws.** Energy is a flow — consumed
|
|
and replenished continuously, gone after use. Material is a stock — incorporated into
|
|
structures and recovered when structures are dismantled. They have different sources,
|
|
different timescales, and different recovery dynamics. A behavior can be energetically
|
|
affordable yet materially limited, or vice versa. Conflating them would destroy both
|
|
conservation laws; keeping them separate is what makes resource accounting honest.
|
|
|
|
**Every economy has a single capped root.** Each resource traces back to one producer
|
|
with a hard ceiling — the astrocyte cell body for synaptic energy, the soma for neuronal
|
|
material. Everything downstream competes for shares of that capped production. The ceiling
|
|
is the ultimate arbiter of how much the system can do, and it is set outside the system.
|
|
|
|
**Conservation makes one synapse's gain another's loss.** Because resources are shared and
|
|
finite, strengthening one site necessarily reduces what is available elsewhere. This
|
|
coupling is not designed — it is the automatic consequence of drawing from a common pool.
|
|
Depression at one synapse returns resources that partially fund potentiation at another.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## II. Time and Scope
|
|
|
|
**Behavior and structural change occupy separate scopes.** Fast behavior happens in DAY;
|
|
permanent change happens in NIGHT. This separation prevents transient activity from
|
|
directly rewriting architecture — otherwise every noise spike would remodel the system.
|
|
The scope boundary is what makes the system both responsive and stable.
|
|
|
|
**DAY accumulates evidence; NIGHT acts on it.** No permanent decision is made in the
|
|
moment. DAY only gathers traces. NIGHT reads the aggregated evidence and commits. The
|
|
system always defers commitment to a consolidation phase that operates on accumulated
|
|
evidence, never on a single instant.
|
|
|
|
**Timescale is meaning.** Fast traces decay in milliseconds, tags in hours, structures
|
|
over days. The decay constant of a variable is not a parameter — it is what the variable
|
|
means. A fast-decaying variable is a momentary signal; a slow-decaying one is a
|
|
commitment. Putting two timescales in one variable destroys both meanings — which is why
|
|
every quantity that carries both a momentary and a lasting role must be split into two
|
|
variables with two decay constants.
|
|
|
|
**Time windows are enforced by chemistry, not by clocks.** The system never checks a
|
|
timer. Coincidence windows emerge from the competition between accumulation and decay. A
|
|
signal must arrive while a trace is still elevated; the window opens when the trace crosses
|
|
threshold and closes when it decays below it. Timing is a consequence of dynamics, never
|
|
an explicit rule.
|
|
|
|
**The rest period is the execution window.** DAY fills the system with evidence but
|
|
commits nothing. NIGHT executes — writing structure and budget capacity, replenishing
|
|
pools, clearing traces. Neither scope alone suffices: DAY without NIGHT produces learning
|
|
that cannot consolidate; NIGHT without DAY produces replenishment with nothing to
|
|
consolidate. The alternation is not incidental — it is architectural.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## III. Capacity and Occupancy
|
|
|
|
**NIGHT builds containers; DAY fills them.** Every slow variable is a capacity — a ceiling
|
|
on what behavior can achieve. NIGHT changes the ceiling; DAY operates within it. The two
|
|
never do each other's job: NIGHT never places a receptor, DAY never builds a slot. This
|
|
single principle organizes the entire architecture.
|
|
|
|
**Short-term change is occupancy; long-term change is capacity.** Filling a container is
|
|
fast and reversible; resizing it is slow and persistent. The same physical quantity —
|
|
receptor count, vesicle count, fuel level — has a fast component (how full) and a slow
|
|
component (how big), governed by entirely different processes at entirely different scopes.
|
|
|
|
**Two capacities, two drives, one pool.** Structure is the capacity for strength — how
|
|
powerfully each behavior can act. Budget capacity is the capacity for endurance — how long
|
|
behavior can be sustained. Both are ceilings built at NIGHT and filled competitively at
|
|
DAY. Both draw from the same finite material and energy, so strength and endurance compete:
|
|
investing endurance somewhere cannot strengthen elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
**A ceiling is never free, even during DAY.** Building a ceiling at NIGHT costs material
|
|
and energy; filling it at DAY costs a competitive share of a shared resource. Structure
|
|
must be filled by winning occupancy; budget capacity must be filled by winning shared fuel.
|
|
A high ceiling of either kind makes a large standing claim that the component can satisfy
|
|
only if it out-competes its neighbors. Capacity that cannot be filled is capacity wasted.
|
|
|
|
**Structure shapes form, not just maximum.** Structure does not merely set a ceiling — it
|
|
shapes the transfer function between input and output at every moment. Tightly clustered
|
|
calcium channels make each spike more reliably coupled to release; more anchoring slots
|
|
make each glutamate pulse more faithfully converted to current; tonic D-serine keeps the
|
|
gate chronically primed. The architecture conditions the quality of behavior continuously,
|
|
not just its peak.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## IV. The Timescale Ladder
|
|
|
|
This is the spine the other principles hang from. The system's quantities occupy four nested
|
|
tiers, and timescale is not incidental to them — it *is* what distinguishes them.
|
|
|
|
**Four tiers, by timescale.** FAST traces (milliseconds to seconds) — the residual calcium, the
|
|
synaptic current, the immediate response. MEDIUM occupancy and evidence (seconds to minutes) —
|
|
the filled receptor surface and channel coupling, the accumulating possible-tag, the endurance
|
|
need. The SLOW tag (hours) — the validated bridge to consolidation. PERSISTENT capacity
|
|
(written only at NIGHT, drifting over days) — the structure and budget ceilings. Each tier
|
|
decays on its own timescale, and that decay constant is the tier's meaning: a fast-decaying
|
|
quantity is a momentary signal, a slow one a commitment, and a non-decaying one a capacity.
|
|
|
|
**The tiers are a ladder, not just four speeds.** Each rung's output is the next rung's input,
|
|
and the coupling runs in two directions at once.
|
|
|
|
**Capacity flows downward — each slower tier sets the ceiling for the faster one below it.**
|
|
Persistent structure bounds how far medium occupancy can fill; medium occupancy (current
|
|
coupling, current receptor surface) bounds how strongly fast behavior can act. A behavior never
|
|
acts beyond the occupancy currently filled, and occupancy never fills beyond the structure built
|
|
last night. The ceiling at every level was set by the level above, on a slower timescale.
|
|
|
|
**Evidence flows upward — each faster tier accumulates toward the slower one above it.** Fast
|
|
traces accumulate into medium evidence (possible-tag and endurance-need); medium evidence
|
|
bridges, on coincidence with validation, into the slow tag; the slow tag commits, at NIGHT, into
|
|
persistent capacity. Each tier is the evidence from which the next slower tier is built, and
|
|
nothing reaches a slower tier without having accumulated through the faster ones first.
|
|
|
|
**Both pathways are instances of the climb.** The strength pathway (fast trace → medium
|
|
possible-tag → slow tag → persistent structure) and the endurance pathway (fast trace → medium
|
|
endurance-need → persistent budget ceiling) are the same upward flow of evidence, differing only
|
|
in what validates the climb — associative dopamine for strength, homeostatic fuel-shortfall for
|
|
endurance. And both ceilings they build then flow back downward as the bounds the next day's
|
|
behavior runs within.
|
|
|
|
**This single image contains the model's whole logic.** Capacity-versus-occupancy is the
|
|
downward flow; the two evidence streams are the upward flow; the DAY/NIGHT split is just where
|
|
the ladder is climbed (evidence accumulates by DAY) versus where it is committed (capacity is
|
|
written at NIGHT). The functional groups enact the ladder: ADJUST and BEHAVE read capacity
|
|
downward, TRACE accumulates evidence upward, and NIGHT commits the top of the upward flow into
|
|
the source of the downward flow. To understand the system is to see that it is a four-rung ladder
|
|
with capacity descending and evidence ascending, turning once per DAY/NIGHT cycle.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## V. Locality
|
|
|
|
**Only local evaluation.** Every decision a component makes — to act, to deposit a trace,
|
|
to register an interrupted success — uses only information physically present in that
|
|
component. A component cannot read another compartment's internal state. The presynapse
|
|
does not know the postsynapse's calcium; the dendrite does not know which distal spines are
|
|
active; the astrosynapse does not know whether the postsynapse is waiting. Each judges from
|
|
its own state alone.
|
|
|
|
**Cross-compartment influence travels only as signals that arrive and become local.**
|
|
Information crosses a boundary only by being sent — feedforward transmission, retrograde
|
|
messengers, neuromodulatory broadcast. A signal in transit is invisible; a signal that has
|
|
arrived is local and can be read. The presynapse can incorporate downstream success only
|
|
through the portion the postsynapse chose to release as a retrograde messenger, and only
|
|
after it landed. Downstream reaches upstream by emitting; upstream never reaches into
|
|
downstream.
|
|
|
|
**Each component's notion of success is its own.** Because evaluation is local, "was my
|
|
interrupted behavior worth sustaining" is answered by the component's own activity —
|
|
was I working hard and effectively from my own point of view — optionally amplified by
|
|
feedback that has arrived. The local proxy differs by component (strong release for the
|
|
presynapse, climbing calcium for the postsynapse, strong propagation for the axon) but the
|
|
shape is identical everywhere: my own vigorous, effective activity, plus whatever feedback
|
|
reached me.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## VI. Validation and Non-Locality
|
|
|
|
**Short-term change is local; long-term change is non-local.** A component can transiently
|
|
strengthen from its own activity alone — occupancy rises with calcium, no permission needed.
|
|
But permanent change requires validation from beyond itself. Cheap reversible change is
|
|
autonomous; expensive permanent change requires external authorization.
|
|
|
|
**Permanent change requires coincidence across spatial scales.** A tag forms only when a
|
|
local eligibility signal meets one or more non-local confirmations that have arrived as
|
|
signals. The number of required coincidences reflects the component's position in the
|
|
hierarchy — the postsynapse, the primary memory locus, requires three (astrosynapse,
|
|
soma, organism). Each scale confirms something the previous scale cannot know about itself.
|
|
|
|
**The whole validates the part; the part cannot validate itself.** A synapse cannot know
|
|
whether its activity was behaviorally significant — that information exists only at the
|
|
organism level and arrives as the neuromodulatory broadcast. This is why the system is
|
|
open: the highest validation enters from outside any component being modified, carried
|
|
inward as a signal that becomes local at the point of use.
|
|
|
|
**Strength is associative; endurance is homeostatic.** Strength requires significance —
|
|
the dopamine coincidence that says "this was worth saving." Endurance requires only that
|
|
fuel, not structure or significance, was the binding constraint on a forming success — it
|
|
needs no validation, because metabolic sustainability is not the organism's to judge. A
|
|
component earns strength by completing validated coincidences and earns endurance by
|
|
running out of fuel at the verge of its own local success.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## VII. Selection and Asymmetry
|
|
|
|
**Potentiation is the active drive; depotentiation is its shadow.** The entire machinery
|
|
is oriented toward strengthening what is significant and sustaining what is fuel-limited.
|
|
There is no symmetric machinery for weakening. Weakening happens to whatever the building
|
|
machinery did not select, as a consequence of the resources building consumed. The system
|
|
is built to learn; forgetting is the cost of learning.
|
|
|
|
**Depression is never explicit — it is what happens when building does not.** No signal
|
|
says "weaken this." Ceilings of both kinds decay continuously and are held up only by
|
|
maintenance. When building consumes the shared resources, unmaintained ceilings drift down.
|
|
Depression is the absence of maintenance, not the presence of a depression signal — and the
|
|
same is true of lost endurance, which is idle metabolic capacity removed for lack of use.
|
|
|
|
**Selection requires winning on multiple independent criteria.** To be permanently
|
|
strengthened a synapse must be both active enough to be fueled and significant enough to be
|
|
validated — independent gates. To be sustainable it must additionally earn endurance where
|
|
fuel was the limit. Activity without significance is not saved; significance without
|
|
sustainable activity cannot be maintained. The conjunction filters for connections that are
|
|
genuinely valuable and genuinely viable.
|
|
|
|
**Equilibrium is the residual of imperfection.** Where alignment or balance is achieved,
|
|
the very success removes the signal that drove it, allowing slow drift back toward
|
|
imbalance, which regenerates the driving signal. The soma that aligns to its input rhythm
|
|
stops generating the mismatch that aligned it, drifts, and re-aligns. The component that
|
|
builds enough endurance stops depleting, loses the endurance signal, and lets capacity
|
|
decay until depletion returns. The system hovers near optimum, never resting there,
|
|
continuously corrected by the small errors its own imperfect state produces.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## VIII. Bottom-Up Emergence
|
|
|
|
**Complex temporal behavior emerges from local reactive traces, not explicit computation.**
|
|
The soma aligns with its input rhythm without representing the rhythm — it leaves a trace
|
|
when input arrives during refractoriness and lets that trace speed future recovery.
|
|
Prediction, anticipation, and rhythm-tracking emerge from purely local reactive deposits,
|
|
never from a model of the future.
|
|
|
|
**The system never represents what it is becoming tuned to.** A potentiated synapse does
|
|
not contain a representation of its pattern — it is physically biased toward it. The tuning
|
|
is the structure, not a description of the structure. Prediction is implicit physical bias,
|
|
not explicit expectation. The same is true of every adaptation: refractory alignment,
|
|
endurance conditioning, astrosynaptic wrapping — all are bias, none is description.
|
|
|
|
**Global organization arises from local competition.** Sparsification, normalization, and
|
|
winner-take-more dynamics are nowhere computed centrally. They emerge automatically from
|
|
many local units drawing from shared pools. The astrocyte does not decide which synapses to
|
|
fuel — the synapses' own demands, each a purely local quantity, competing for capped
|
|
production, produce the allocation. No allocator exists; the allocation is real.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## IX. Coupling, Openness, and Boundedness
|
|
|
|
**Couplings create trajectories, not just states.** Some variables, once moved, make
|
|
further movement in the same direction easier — the astrosynapse wrapping tighter after
|
|
potentiation, which makes future potentiation easier. These self-reinforcing couplings give
|
|
the system momentum: it does not merely occupy states, it follows trajectories, deepening
|
|
whatever direction it has begun. The astrosynapse is the strongest such coupling — the gain
|
|
control that reshapes the input itself, amplifying whatever trajectory the synapse is on.
|
|
|
|
**The same signal can serve opposite functions through different receptors.** Glutamate
|
|
spillover brakes the presynapse while exciting the astrocyte — one ligand, two receptor
|
|
types, opposite cascades, simultaneous opposite effects. Function is determined by the
|
|
receiver, not the signal. One event coordinates multiple responses with no coordinating
|
|
mechanism.
|
|
|
|
**Energy availability is itself a selective pressure, parallel to validation.** Beyond the
|
|
explicit activity-and-reward gating, the simple availability of fuel continuously selects
|
|
which components can participate. A synapse that cannot be fueled cannot generate the
|
|
activity that would let it be tagged. Metabolism silently shapes what can be learned, in
|
|
parallel with and independent of the plasticity machinery.
|
|
|
|
**The system is finite and open, not infinite and closed.** It has bounded components and a
|
|
bounded state space, and it receives inputs it cannot generate from within — sensory drive,
|
|
neuromodulatory validation, metabolic supply. Because it is finite, its self-modification
|
|
does not generate infinite regress. Because it is open, its highest validation comes from
|
|
outside itself.
|
|
|
|
**The fixed points are made explicit, not hidden.** The parameters the system cannot modify
|
|
from within — thresholds, the vascular ceiling, the neuromodulatory signals — are declared
|
|
as fixed. They are the system's boundary with what it did not set and cannot inspect.
|
|
Making them explicit is the honest acknowledgment that every self-modifying system operates
|
|
within constraints it did not choose.
|
|
|
|
**Validation comes from embedding, not from internal consistency.** The system does not
|
|
certify its own changes. Whether a structural change was good is answered by the organism's
|
|
subsequent experience in the world, fed back through the neuromodulatory system. Correctness
|
|
is determined by the coupling between system and environment, not by any internal criterion.
|
|
The fixed point lies outside: the system acts, the world responds, and the response — not
|
|
any internal check — determines what was worth keeping.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## X. From Local Expression to Holistic System
|
|
|
|
The preceding principles are stated almost entirely in local terms. Every behavior is a
|
|
local component acting on its own state within its own budget. Every evaluation uses only
|
|
local information and signals that have arrived. Every trace is a local record; every tag a
|
|
local conjunction; every commit a local draw on a shared pool. Nowhere is there a central
|
|
controller, a global plan, a representation of the whole. And yet the system behaves as a
|
|
whole. This final category states why the local necessarily becomes holistic.
|
|
|
|
**The whole exists in the shared pools, not in any component.** The only thing every
|
|
component touches is the finite resource it competes for. No component sees the whole, but
|
|
every component is coupled to every other through the pool they share. When one draws, all
|
|
others have less; when one returns, all others have more. The pool is the medium through
|
|
which purely local actions become globally consequential. The holism is not represented
|
|
anywhere — it is enacted in the competition for a common, capped resource.
|
|
|
|
**Coincidence across scales stitches the levels into one.** A permanent change at the
|
|
smallest scale requires confirmation from progressively larger scales — astrosynapse, soma,
|
|
organism. Each scale contributes what the scale below cannot know about itself. The result
|
|
is that no permanent change reflects a single level; every one reflects an agreement across
|
|
all levels that happened to align in a window. The system's memory is therefore never local
|
|
even though every step that produced it was. The whole writes itself into the part, through
|
|
the part's requirement for non-local confirmation.
|
|
|
|
**Signals make the boundaries permeable without dissolving them.** Components remain
|
|
strictly local — they cannot read each other — yet they are not isolated, because they emit
|
|
and receive signals. Feedforward transmission, retrograde feedback, and broadcast
|
|
neuromodulation knit the local components into a communicating whole without ever giving any
|
|
component access to another's interior. The system is simultaneously fully local in its
|
|
evaluation and fully connected in its dynamics. This is the precise sense in which a
|
|
holistic system is built from local parts: not by any part containing the whole, but by the
|
|
parts being coupled through resources and signals into a dynamics that no part could produce
|
|
alone.
|
|
|
|
**The whole has properties no component has.** Sparsification, rhythm, equilibrium,
|
|
prediction, memory, the joint selection for significance-and-sustainability — none of these
|
|
exists in any single component. They are properties of the coupled population drawing on
|
|
shared pools and exchanging signals over the DAY-NIGHT cycle. The component knows only its
|
|
own state and its own budget; the system knows what to remember, what to sustain, and what
|
|
to let fade. The gap between these is not bridged by any component understanding more — it
|
|
is bridged by the structure of the coupling itself. The holistic behavior is real, it is
|
|
not represented anywhere, and it could not be removed without removing the couplings that
|
|
constitute it.
|
|
|
|
**This is what it means for understanding to be enacted rather than encoded.** The system
|
|
does not contain a model of what it is doing. It does not represent the pattern it learns,
|
|
the rhythm it tracks, or the criterion by which it selects. Each of these is a physical bias
|
|
distributed across local components coupled through shared resources and signals. The whole
|
|
is not in any part and not in any representation — it is in the doing, in the ongoing
|
|
competitive, signal-mediated, scope-alternating process itself. A local expression, faithful
|
|
to locality at every step, produces a holistic system precisely because the locality is
|
|
coupled — and coupling, not representation, is what makes a whole.
|