Computational Irreducibility & Emergence

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Chapter 11: Models of Computation
Advertisements

CS 345: Chapter 9 Algorithmic Universality and Its Robustness
Variants of Turing machines
Simulating a modern computer by a Turing machine and vice versa CS 6800 Instructor: Dr. Elise de Doncker By Shweta Gowda Saikiran Ponnam.
Complexity 7-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Complexity of Problems.
Complexity 11-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Space Complexity.
1 Introduction to Computability Theory Lecture11: Variants of Turing Machines Prof. Amos Israeli.
Cellular Automata (Reading: Chapter 10, Complexity: A Guided Tour)
Complexity ©D.Moshkovitz 1 Turing Machines. Complexity ©D.Moshkovitz 2 Motivation Our main goal in this course is to analyze problems and categorize them.
Complexity 5-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Complexity of Problems.
CHAPTER 4 Decidability Contents Decidable Languages
Automata & Formal Languages, Feodor F. Dragan, Kent State University 1 CHAPTER 5 Reducibility Contents Undecidable Problems from Language Theory.
Remaining Topics Decidability Concept 4.1 The Halting Problem 4.2
Theory of Computing Lecture 15 MAS 714 Hartmut Klauck.
Theory of Computing Lecture 21 MAS 714 Hartmut Klauck.
Halting Problem Introduction to Computing Science and Programming I.
Measuring complexity Section 7.1 Giorgi Japaridze Theory of Computability.
1Computer Sciences Department. Book: INTRODUCTION TO THE THEORY OF COMPUTATION, SECOND EDITION, by: MICHAEL SIPSER Reference 3Computer Sciences Department.
Interactive computability Episode 13 0 Hard-play machines (HPMs) Easy-play machines (EPMs) Definition of interactive computability The interactive version.
Theory of Computational Complexity Yuji Ishikawa Avis lab. M1.
Recall last lecture and Nondeterministic TMs Ola Svensson.
Chapter 9 Turing Machines What would happen if we change the stack in Pushdown Automata into some other storage device? Truing Machines, which maintains.
CSCI 2670 Introduction to Theory of Computing November 15, 2005.
 2005 SDU Lecture14 Mapping Reducibility, Complexity.
Modeling Arithmetic, Computation, and Languages Mathematical Structures for Computer Science Chapter 8 Copyright © 2006 W.H. Freeman & Co.MSCS SlidesTuring.
Turing’s Thesis.
The Acceptance Problem for TMs
CSE202: Introduction to Formal Languages and Automata Theory
Introduction to Computing Science and Programming I
Cellular automata.
On Routine Evolution of Complex Cellular Automata
Time complexity Here we will consider elements of computational complexity theory – an investigation of the time (or other resources) required for solving.
Busch Complexity Lectures: Turing Machines
Analysis of Algorithms & Orders of Growth
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
Busch Complexity Lectures: Reductions
Linear Bounded Automata LBAs
CSE 311 Foundations of Computing I
Reductions.
Turing Machines Space bounds Reductions Complexity classes
Reductions Costas Busch - LSU.
Pushdown Automata.
Pushdown Automata.
Numerical Representation of Strings
OTHER MODELS OF TURING MACHINES
HIERARCHY THEOREMS Hu Rui Prof. Takahashi laboratory
Turing Machines Acceptors; Enumerators
Hierarchy of languages
Jaya Krishna, M.Tech, Assistant Professor
Turing Machines (TM) Deterministic Turing Machine (DTM)
Cellular Automata.
Alternating tree Automata and Parity games
Non-Deterministic Finite Automata
Decidable Languages Costas Busch - LSU.
Finite Automata Reading: Chapter 2.
Undecidable problems:
Computability and Complexity
CS154, Lecture 12: Time Complexity
Formal Languages, Automata and Models of Computation
CSC 4170 Theory of Computation Time complexity Section 7.1.
Recall last lecture and Nondeterministic TMs
Turing Machines Complexity ©D.Moshkovitz.
Theory of Computation Lecture 21: Turing Machines II
CSE S. Tanimoto Turing Completeness
Variants of Turing machines
DSPACE Slides By: Alexander Eskin, Ilya Berdichevsky
More Undecidable Problems
CSC 4170 Theory of Computation Time complexity Section 7.1.
Lecture 4: Unsolvable Problems
Interactive computability
Presentation transcript:

Computational Irreducibility & Emergence Hervé ZWIRN CNRS & Paris Diderot University (LIED) ENS Cachan (CMLA) IHPST Histoire et Philosophie de l’Informatique IHPST le 22 juin 2017 Hervé ZWIRN

Computational Irreducibility Determinism and Impredictibility A few examples Cellular automata : general framework (discret) Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Langton’s ant Rules: 1. If the ant is on a black square, it turns right   and moves forward one unit. 2. If the ant is on a white square, it turns left   and moves forward one unit. 3. When the ant leaves a square, it inverts the color. Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Langton’s ant Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility This is impredictible and nobody knows how to prove that.  The only way to know what happens is to run a simulation of the 10 000 steps of the ant and see what happens Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Rule 30 Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Rule 110 Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Rule 110 If you want to know what is the 1 000th line, you have to run the simulation and go through the 999 previous steps. There is no other way, no shortcut allowing to compute the nth line without going through the (n-1) previous steps. Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Conway’s game of life Any live cell with fewer than two or more than three live neighbours dies. Any live cell with two or three live neighbours lives on to the next generation. Any dead cell with exactly three live neighbours becomes a live cell. Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Conway’s game of life   Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Conway’s game of life Glider gun Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Conway’s game of life Hervé ZWIRN

Determinism and Impredictibility Computational Irreducibility CIR The behavior of the system can be found only by direct simulation or observation: No general predictive procedure is possible. Wolfram S., Undecidability and intractability in theoretical physics, Vol 54, N 8. Phys. Rev. Letters, 1985 Hervé ZWIRN

Computational Irreducibility Predicting : Knowing the result before the system computing faster than the system finding shortcuts Intuitively a system will be CIR if there is no other way to reach the nth state than to go successively through the (n-1) previous ones. There is no shortcut. This is not a robust definition since we would like a process to be CIR even if it is possible to reach the nth state by going through (n-1) states that are “near” of the (n-1) previous states of the system if it is still impossible to go directly to it. Hervé ZWIRN

Computational Irreducibility Giving a rigorous and robust definition is not easy because it is necessary to precise formally which path of (n-1) steps is acceptable as being near the real path followed by the system. H. Zwirn & J.P. Delahaye , Irreducibility and Computational Equivalence: Wolfram Science 10 Years After the Publication of A New Kind of Science, H. Zenil (Ed), Springer, 2013  H. Zwirn, Computational Irredudicibility and Computational Analogy, Complex Systems, Vol 24, Issue 2, 2015 H. Zwirn "Les systèmes déterministes simples sont-ils toujours prédictibles"  in Complexité et désordre, Grenoble Sciences Ed., 2015 H. Zwirn “Emergence et irréductibilité computationnelle”, à paraitre dans « Complexité ​et ​ désordre : adaptation, localisation, dynamique », Editions Matériologiques, 2017 Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility Why is Computational irreducibility (CIR) interesting? From the algorithmic point of view : Is there any robust definition? Do any really CIR processes exist? Philosophical reasons: Understanding the behaviour of Complex Systems Understanding emergent phenomena Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility CIR means impossible to speed-up Is every algorithm ’’speed able’’ ? The computation model matters Turing machines with k tapes (k ≥ 2) Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility Some speed-up theorems: The problem of deciding if a string is a palindrome which is O(n2) in the 1-tape Turing machines model and O(n) in the 2-tape Turing machines model. For any k-tapes Turing machine M operating in time f(n) there exists a k'-tapes Turing machine M' operating in time f'(n)=f(n)+n (where  is an arbitrary small positive constant) which simulates M. Given any k-tape Turing machine M operating within time f(n), it's possible to construct a 1-tape Turing machine M' operating within time O(f(n)2) and such that for any input x, M(x)=M'(x). Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility The computation model Turing machines with 3 symbols (0, 1, #) k ≥ 2 tapes and one way write only tape which is used for output. We suppose that when the computation ends, the result is the number written at the right end of the output tape. Given a Turing machine M computing f(n) in time T(M(n)), let's denote by Rn,1, …, Rn,i, …, Rn,T(M(n)) the content of the output tape of M during the computation of f(n) after 1 step of computation, …, i steps of computation and T(M(n)) steps of computation. Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility (E-Turing machine): A Turing machine Mf will be called a E-Turing machine for f if: (i) Mf computes every f(n) (ii) during the computation of f(n), there exist increasing kn(i) for i=1 to n-1, such that f(i) is written on the output tape Rn,kn(i) at the right of the last symbol # Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility E-Turing machine for f f(1) n-1 f(2) f(n-2) f(1) n f(2) f(n-1) kn-1 (1) kn (1) kn-1 (2) kn (2) f(n-2) kn (n-2) kn-1 (n-2) kn (n-1) kn-1 (n-1) f(n-1) f(n) kn (n) Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility Tentative definition (CIR): A function f will be said CIR if and only if any Turing machine computing every f(n), is a E-Turing machine for f. Not a Robust Definition Need for more sophisticated concepts Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility (Asymptotically optimal Turing machine): We will say that a Turing machine Mf* for f is an asymptotically optimal Turing machine for f if for any other Turing machine M computing f: T(Mf*(n)) = O(T(M(n))) i.e. there are constants c > 0, n0 > 0 such that n > n0, T(Mf* (n))  cT(M(n)). Asymptotically, no other Turing machine computing f computes faster than Mf* We assume that it is the case Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility (Efficient E-Turing machine): We will say that a E-Turing machine Mfeff for f is an efficient E-Turing machine for f if for any other E-Turing machine Mf for f: T(Mfeff(n)) = O(T(Mf(n))) i.e. there are constants c > 0, n0 > 0 such that n > n0, T(Mfeff (n))  cT(Mf(n)). Asymptotically, no other E-Turing machine for f computes faster than Mfeff We assume that it is the case Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility A Turing Machine M will be said to be a P‑approximation of a E‑Turing machine for f if and only if there are a function F such that F(n)=O(T(Mf* (n)/n)) and a Turing machine P such that: (i) on input n, M computes a result rn such that P computes f(n) from rn in a number of steps F(n) and halts. (ii) during the computation, there exist increasing kn(i) for i=1 to n-1, such that P computes f(i) from i and Rn,kn(i) in a number of steps F(i) and halts. Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility P‑approximation of a E‑Turing machine for f f(1) n f(2) f(n-1) P r1 n r2 rn-1 kn (1) kn (2) kn (n-1) O(T(Mf*(n)/n)) f(n) rn kn (n) Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility Let M be a P‑approximation of a E‑Turing machine for f. Computation of f(n) based on the P‑approximation M: The computation of f(n) done initially through M with input n and continued when M has computed rn, by P which computes f(n) from n and rn in a time F(n) and halts. Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility Computation based on a P‑approximation of a E‑Turing machine for f f(1) f(2) f(n-1) P r1 n r2 rn-1 O(T(Mf* (n)/n)) f(n) rn Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility Strongly CIR (resp CIR) function: A function f(n) from N to N will be said to be strongly CIR (resp CIR) if and only if for any Turing machine M computing every f(n) there is a P-approximation of a E‑Turing machine for f, M’, such that for every n (resp. for infinitely many n), the computation of f(n) by M is based on M’. If a function is strongly CIR, for each n there is no other way to compute f(n) than to compute before all the values f(i) for i<n (or values that are near in the sense given in the definition of the approximation of a E-Turing machine). There is no shortcut allowing to get directly the value of f(n) without having computed before f(n-1) or a value that is near f(n-1) and so forth for the previous values. Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility Theorem if f is CIR no Turing machine computing every f(n) can compute f(n) faster than an efficient E­-Turing machine for f. More precisely, if Mf is a Turing machine computing every f(n) and if f is CIR then T(Mfeff(n)) = O(T(Mf(n))). Hervé ZWIRN

Computational irreducibility Possible candidates: Langton’s ant Rule 110 The number of configurations of index < n still alive after n steps in the game of life The function f défined as : f(1) = the first digit of  f(n) = the digit of  after having skipped f(n-1) digits from the digit f(n-1) Open problem: Prove that any of the above possible candidates is CIR. Hervé ZWIRN

Emergence What is necessary for Emergence? 2 levels: individual / collectif micro / macro Knowledge of the rules for the low level Apparent irreducibility of the phenomenon appearing at the upper level to the low level rules Hervé ZWIRN

Emergence appears when the dynamics of the low level is CIR Objective (weak) emergence Objective emergence should be independant of our human capacities. Non-epistemic criterion. Emergence appears when the dynamics of the low level is CIR Hervé ZWIRN