This page is created to easily find the thoughts related to automation of decision making. If all the data is made to stay in single page without giving different pages, one needs to scroll down to find the required thought group, but on keeping main groups separately in different pages, through link, it is easy to see the required thoughts. For more on this see 12/3/17;1. To know on why there is a need of adding particular thought to a particular group, see 26/1/17;1.
Retaining Data| 14/7/17: I seem to be not having complete data of experience (example: books I read) had, can in automation I eliminate the loss of data? (Clarification required; 14/7/17; 10)
If exploration is made by using data, is it limited by data I know/remember? (15/7/17; 1b)
How to use most of the data for exploration? (15/7/17; 2)
If I can know on how data is used for exploration, won’t it allow to see possibilities of retaining the conformations needed for exploration? (19/7/17; 4)
Am I using data at greater depth(?) when the time between the data reception and use of it is less? (Clarification required; 19/7/17; 5)
[Optimized Thought] Automating The Process Of Making Optimal Decision| 12/7/17; 13: If I am using data to make optimal decision, is it optimal to automate the conformations I am making for that? (12/7/17; 13)
If we wouldn’t have had the computer programming skill, would I have thought about the possibility of automating the conformation of making optimal decision? (12/7/17; 14)
How was this automation possible? (12/7/17; 16)
I seem to be reaching general optimized thought with time; if I would have had directly started making certain actions without exploring more, would this optimization happen? (Clarification required; 12/7/17; 15)
What if I don’t know other ways of attaining the ease? I knew programming, this made me see if it would help here, but I don’t know other possibilities. (Clarification required; 12/7/17; 16)
Links: Possible if thought;
How to know all the ease possibilities/actions? (Clarification required; 12/7/17; 17)
How are ease possibilities/actions known? (Clarification required; 12/7/17; 23)
If I continue on automating the process, and if there is a possibility more optimal than automation, won’t my action be not optimal? (12/7/17; 19)
Do I then need to know the way of automating the way of knowing the optimal ease possibility(?)? (Clarification required; 12/7/17; 20)
How does automation allow attaining utility in least time? Isn’t automation the action of seeing patterns and then making the actions in least time? (Clarification required; 12/7/17; 26)
Am I not forgetting certain data, can this be eliminated in automation? (Clarification required; 12/7/17; 27)
Beyond Automation| 12/7/17;18: Nothing yet….
Creating The Ready-Made Syntax Of Exploration| 13/7/17; 8: Nothing yet…
Elemental Expression| 28/6/17;10: Does expressing in elemental form allow greater exploration, from the possibilities which can be seen from its extended description(?)? (28/6/17; 10)
Is elemental form the expression, expressing the conformations expressed in sound/word? (28/6/17; 12)
How can the new explorations be made from the elemental-expression expressing the conformations of compound/compressed expression? As the elemental-expression gives more conformations, won’t it be easy to explore from the re-arrangement of conformations? (Clarification required; 28/6/17; 13)
Does the elemental form eliminate the labor of knowing the conformations by expressing them directly? (29/6/17; 6)
What possibilities can be seen from elemental form? (28/6/17; 11)
Does the elemental-expression give more ease to see all the conformations than the compressed compound expression? (28/6/17; 14)
How does greater number of conformations allow greater exploration? (28/6/17; 15)
Expected Exploration: Against compression?; What is exploration?;
Does compression in certain cases allow faster exploration by eliminating certain verification? If yes, can’t compression be made without eliminating verification? (Clarification required; 28/6/17; 16)
Is exploration an action which allows knowing the desired conformations? (To be verified; 28/6/17: 19)
Exploration Mechanism| 18/5/17: When I am trying to explore on a thought, how do I explore it? Try observing the exploration mechanism (?). (Clarification required, 18/5/17)
If I can express the conformation of the word/sound, doesn’t that allow seeing other variables which can give exploration? (Clarification required; 22/6/17; 10)
Why was the word/sound not able to allow exploration? (22/6/17; 11)
Won’t recording the exploration ways allow to slowly complete all the exploration even if the speed of expression is low, as it the guarantees the imbibed exploration to be done? (Clarification required; 7/7/17; 24)
Clash/Exploration Of Different Exploration Mechanisms (or humans or Machines) On The Same Data| 18/5/17: Nothing yet…
Miscellaneous| 19/6/17: Describing the action of the sound or word used, seems to allow exploration of varying the possibilities of the description to see other possibilities. (Clarification required, 19/6/17)
Chances Of Possibility On Exploration| < 28/3/17: There seems to be a chance of the possibility if one explores on anything, which gives the explanation of the chances of that conformation by the elements of that domain. (Clarification required, 28/3/17)
Chances of possibility seems to be known only when explored. (28/3/17)
Types Of Exploration| 16/4/17:
(Taboo?) Possibility Exploration| 16/4/17: Isn’t the exploration in “How to check harmony with all the data? Is there no way to make complete exploration of harmony checking without having complete data?” trying to search for the possibility? (16/4/17)
Harmony-Checking Exploration| 16/4/17: Nothing yet…
Exploration For Knowing The Conformation Working From Its Elements (?)| 6/6/17: Nothing yet…
Exploration For Finding Ambiguity (?)| 6/6/17: Nothing yet; clarification required.
Evolution Of Exploration/Thought Structure; Reasons/Construction Forces Behind The Particular Exploration Conformation| 16/3/17: What makes one ask questions, whose necessity others have difficulty in knowing? (17/3/17)
Principles Of Exploration| 20/3/17: Rough recording of thought in the book: "Word meaning going out of sync with representational name…What is the reason for this conformation?” How did I arrive at the above exploration? Need I keep a separate section for tracking the origins of every exploration? (16/4/17)
Does the question ”what is the reason for this conformation” indicate on there being a reason for this conformation? Am I only exploring/questioning the no-harmony of my intuitions or my data which I have? (16/4/17)
How to check harmony with all the data? Is there no way to make complete exploration of harmony checking without having complete data? (16/4/17)
Experience| Stephen Sir asked everyone in the class (PCM 2014-17 Class of St.Joseph’s College) to write their aim in book, I started constructing my aim by even considering what others might argue about it, to remove misunderstanding. I had been saying about achieving immortality “for answering questions of this world”; I seem to have been faulty there or might even be now (due to immediate need of providing reasoning and being not able to bring out the inner primary reason?), and was not able to give the supporting reasoning of achieving it for the sake of eliminating unpredictable consequences to us after death, or to have greater lifespan to know the complete mechanism of this world for deciding on the what we all need to do. Everyone were asking on why we should answer the questions of this world, here there is a notion of we being bound. Stephen Sir, as seen by me, always supported flexibility; based on the argument of why we should answer the questions, Sir eliminated achieving immortality as being the aim which would not be of need to everyone to achieve in primary. Based on this I seem to have explored on showing flexibility nature in having an option of living than dying through the research on immortality. (Clarification required, 20/3/17)
Thought| Are certain explorations constructed considering not shown counter arguments? (20/3/17)
Links: See the book “Explanation” which had Einstein in its cover;
Not-needed Sounds For Soothing (bringing evenness) Of The Expression| < 21/4/17: I seem to be adding more words to avoid the sentence look odd in sound. (22/4/17)
What determines the oddity of sounds? (22/4/17)
Links: Origins and evolution of human language;
Thinking/Exploration Conformations| 2/2/17: Principle: I seem to be using similarity checking as the way of exploration/thinking.
Examples: If I am seeing anything wrong in another, I seem to be trying to see such elements in me, which may be making me work in a wrong way. Yucky; what is giving this notion here in this example? (2/2/17)
[Gen] Elemental Conformations Of Exploration| 1/3/17: Nothing yet…
[Gen] Use Of Elaboration/Expansion| 28/2/17: Doesn’t elaboration increase the clarity of data? How? See 22/6/17;10. (28/2/17)
Observe The Origins Of Your Thought| 15/1/17: Experience| I was thinking on knowing all the reasons of a particular case, this connected me with the word “manually” (work which I am doing to collect reasons), and this connected me with the discussion I made with Desmond similar to creating an automated reason collecting system. Is my brain connecting similar thoughts in the near time? (5/3/17)
Adding the experience to our thought seems to be helping a bit in knowing its origins. (15/1/17)
This might help in automating thought production. (15/1/17)
If I want to identify/conceive more possibilities on a particular arena, I can try devising new methods/algorithms by using the identification of origins of thought and the existent group of thought groups (which might help in exponential growth of thoughts). (B11P158, 15/1/17)
Thinking On All The Possibilities At Every Stage| 15/1/17: Nothing yet....
Automated Thinking | <12/08/2016: To generate automation, shouldn't you know more on the structure of language or the element of language enabling automated exploration? (25/1/17)
[Gen] Exploration Machine/Euler Machine| 26/2/17: Which is the optimal path? Need I first know new exploratory elemental conformations to expand my thinking to “automize” (word credits: Cheriyan Alexander) exploration or can I proceed to automize with the existing elementary exploration conformations? What if the invention or discovering of new elementary exploration conformations require more exploration, and the existing elements itself are enough to create automization? (11/3/17)
Expected Exploration| Think on the machine which can explore all the near possible conformations of reasoning and then even to the threshold level. (28/2/17)
If all the notions are given unique representation, doesn’t it allow to make similarity checking automated and even having the THRESHOLD exploration with the coverage of all the possible arrangements? (Clarification required, 28/2/17)
Is it necessary to know the elements to have relational name containing language? Am I not now using relations behind non-relational named sounds for exploration? Then is it not possible to now have a relational language, which we can expand later into more elementary area? (Clarification required, 13/3/17)
Evolution Of Big Exploration| 12/3/17: If we can understand on how big theories evolve to answer big questions, doesn’t that help in knowing the important structure in how exploration evolves? Doesn’t this help in automating exploration? (12/3/17)
Mechanism Of Exploration| 28/2/17: [Gen] Is similarity checking the only way of exploration? (28/2/17)
[Gen] Other Ways Of Thinking Than Multiple Deductions, Harmony Checker (For Verification), And Similarity Exploration| 23/2/17: Isn’t identification of the processes happening around, an exploration? (12/3/17)
Knowing Exploration Mechanism| 30/6/17;9: Is there a need now, of knowing exploration mechanism? (30/6/17; 9)
When do I need to take exploration to another thought? (Clarification required; 30/6/17; 10)
Knowing the mechanism of exploration might allow automation of exploration. (Clarification required; 30/6/17; 14)
Checking the harmony of a statement | 6/1/17: Experience (E)| My teacher said on the change in the wavelength of photon w.r.t to the observer, to depend on the relative velocities of both observer and the source. I then processed to see whether it is harmonious w.r.t other known statements, like, the color of the same photon or light will be different w.r.t different observers!
Thought (T)| We haven't found any ambiguity here, we may not, or we may, if we can scan the same statement for harmony with all other known statements. Can we create an automated algorithm for scanning the harmony?
Would it be possible to make connected progress, if one part of the thought gets more clarity, all the other thoughts which depend on it might also get more clarity-- a brickary movement (expression used to denote the notion seen in the Brick Game).
Can we have system like that in computer program execution, where it results in errors or no errors? Think on making the system flexible. Explore with the notion of possibilities a man uses in the movie to see the possible path he can take via his cycle to avoid any accidents. See this video clip from 3:18: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qrwp_XkxJU8 (6/1/17)
Through this can't we also have complete utility of the known updated statement, and even the faster evolution of all the related fields? (6/1/17)
All these notion of new systems seems to be coming from my random transitional experience on Computer Science in PUC or my random game experience; transitional experience is showing a sign of usefulness, where is this leakage happening against evolutionary way? Think on this by also connecting with intense or higher exploratory way notion. (6/1/17)
Updates To The Old Exploration?| 14/7/17;14: How are new explorations made in the old explorations? (14/7/17; 14)
Comments
Post a Comment