C4 hosts several working groups and workshops per year. Working groups are usually closed (invited participants only). Workshops are sometimes open to the university community. If you would like more information about an upcoming event, please send an inquiry to email@example.com and mention C4. Events are listed below.
C4 Collective Cognition Working Group: Quantifying Distributed Inference
July 29-30, 2013, Santa Fe Institute
Bryan Daniels (Center for Complexity & Collective Computation, WID)
Chris Ellison (Center for Complexity & Collective Computation, WID)
Philip Poon (Center for Complexity & Collective Computation, WID)
Funding for this meeting comes from a subaward to University of Wisconsin, Madison from the Santa Fe Institute under a grant from the John Templeton Foundation for the study of complexity. The UW Madison PI and COI on this grant are David Krakauer and Jessica Flack.
A living organism is a reflection of its past environment: When it is able to sense environmental regularities over evolutionary or developmental time, an organism and its behavior can be viewed as a hypothesis about environmental states that it will encounter in the future. In viewing the organism and its behavior as a prediction, we can recast adaptation and cognition as two parts of a broader process of inductive inference. Furthermore, when aggregates of adaptive organisms generate regularities at new temporal and spatial scales, this may allow for collective cognition: The new scales provide structure for further interactions and make them more predictable, reducing social uncertainty and facilitating adaptation at the aggregate level.
In this workshop, we will consider two broad questions:
How can adaptation and cognition be quantitatively understood in terms of statistical inference and information theory?
Can we use such a quantitative framework to understand coordinated aggregates, explaining how components with only partially overlapping interests may join to form a more predictive whole? Is there any insight to be gained from thinking about collective behavior as a computation?
Working Group: What is an Individual?
December 14-16, 2012
Lynn Nyhart (History of Science, Madison)
Scott Gilbert (Biology, Swarthmore)
Partial funding for this meeting comes from a subaward to University of Wisconsin, Madison from the Santa Fe Institute under a grant from the John Templeton Foundation for the study of complexity. The Madison PI and COI on this grant are David Krakauer and Jessica Flack.
Workshop Background & Objectives
The goal of the workshop and edited volume intended as its outcome is to mount a multi-disciplinary attack on the problem of individuality, bringing together historians, philosophers, and biologists with the aim of producing a synthetic, multifaceted understanding of this topic.
Collectively, we aim 1) to identify the leading conceptualizations of biological individuality, what they are good for, and under what circumstances, at levels of organization ranging from genetic to organismal to societal; 2) to identify the many criteria for biological individuation, their assumptions, the knowledge domains in which they are (most to least) applicable, and the consequences of applying different criteria at different levels of organization; 3) to use multiple methods and to purposefully draw on multiple disciplinary traditions – historical, social, philosophical, and biological – that actually circumscribe the empirical research problems, the underlying reasoning, and both the scientific and the popular understanding of biological individuality; and 4) to collectively produce a better articulated and more powerful set of concepts surrounding biological part-whole relations.
Few problems are more foundational than the nature of part-whole relations in biology, yet we lack a synoptic perspective on the problem. Through this volume, we seek to establish “the problem of biological individuality,” as we shall call it, as a major interdisciplinary research area that will have a significant place in the history and social studies of biology, the philosophy of biology, and biology itself. By putting members of these different communities into a common project, we will provide a structure for sorting out the many tangled conceptualizations, assumptions, criteria, and uses of biological individuality, and shape an understanding that will benefit all. In this way, we hope to offer a model of interdisciplinary knowledge production that is transferable to other scientific problems.