High-Intelligence & Decision Research Group

 FIM - CAMO Unit Research Portal


 Definition of Universal Management Paradigm (UMP) :  

TOGA Approach

e-article: Adam Maria Gadomski


 HID mission
 High-Intelligent Definition
 Universal Management Paradigm
 HID Group
   Missione

 Terminological  and ontological  explanations:

  1.  Shortest definition of socio-cognitive systems : 
       Socio-cognitive systems are systems which behavior is determined  by cognitive properties of  their 
       components and  invariant social interrelations network between them.

  2. The context of socio-cognitive systems includes: 
 

   identification, design,  specification and  management activities  ,

     where [according to TOGA]: 
     identification  relies  on  the modeling of existing systems, 
     specification relies on the planning/designing of inexistent yet physical or mental entities - it is goal-oriented/driven.

 Application domains 
   Application domains are real-world complex high-risk human activities, see: domains, projects, papers



  High-Intelligence: Functional definition of abstract cognitive high-intelligence
 ( according to the TOGA's paradigms)

       The concept of high-intelligence is used in order to distinguish our interpretation of “intelligence” from numerous commonly used and frequently metaphoric applications of this term. For example, in Soft Computing, which is based on neural networks, evolutionary computing and fuzzy sets approaches, the concept “computational intelligence“ is in use [Sincak, 2000], and according to Bezdek  “A system is computationally intelligent when it: deals only with numerical (low-level) data, … does not use knowledge in the AI sense; … “, and finally, in his recent work (2000) then he tends to the elimination of “the use of seductive semantics in scientific writing”, and computational intelligence has only metaphoric meaning  especially for the reason of ill defined intelligence concept. In general, computational intelligence is usually used in the contexts where AI methods/technologies are used in order to develop software systems which exhibit any property/symptom of  human intelligent behavior.

We start from the assumption that an “essence” of intelligence can be defined and this cognitive capacity is independent on specific domain-dependent individual knowledge, available information and preferences of the subject, following the, so-called, idea of “structural intelligence” explained in [Gadomski, Zytkow, 1983]. 

   The following canonical functional properties of High-Intelligence (as a key property of Abstract Intelligent Agent,  AIA == abstract intelligent entity == syntetic intelligence based system) are assumed: 
 

  •  own preferences-based motivation to interactions with environment

  •  capacity to use available IPK  for goals achieving.

  •  capacity of goals modification according to new information

  •  capacity of self-learning, meta-reasoning and self-consciousness

  •  presence of emotional decision-making component (a not conscious influence of the AIA carrier system  on its reasoning functions).

  • We suppose that all other, more sophisticated, properties of intelligent agents/systems presented in the subject matter literature are derivable from the above canonical properties.

    From the behavioral perspective, an intelligence is visible as an efficacy in the achieving of objectives/goals.
    Here we intend to focus on its cognitive aspects.

    High intelligence is a complex build-in property of intelligent agents, it does not depend on: activity domain, role of intelligent agent and its/his tasks. See also: cognitive intelligence, TOGA  and structural intelligence.

    In this sense, low-intelligence  can be subsequently divided on a general low intelligence and a problem dependent specific low-intelligence.
    More information on intelligent system design, from the meta-knowledge engineering perspective, is presented on the Meta-system engineering page.

     


    Universal Management Paradigm (UMP)

        The Universal Managemant Paradigm includes the essence of the management definition.

       The figure below illustrates 

    complete, relative,  recursive  and incremental
       functional architecture of  High-Intelligence with an emphasis of its organizational aspect. It has been 
       proposed by Gadomski as a hypothesis of Universal  Management Paradigm  (UMP)  valid for every natural 
       and artificial  high-intelligent agents'/entities organization [Gadomski, 97] , as well as a functional "core"
       model of the internal functional architecture of every HIE ( high-intelligent 
    entity).

      On the figure below, UMP is applied to an Emergency Management organization, where a  Management Domain
      is substituted  by a Disaster  Domain. 


    - some comments.

    The UMP scheme defines subjective roles of  5 basic functional objects: manager, informer, executor, advisor and supervisor
    In a human or personoids organization. the presented roles can be unified or decomposed according to the same UMP scheme (a fractal property).

    Two fundamental functional paradigms of high-intelligent entities
     

    According to the TOGA axiomatic assumptions, UMP  is the second after the URP  paradigm (IPK framework). It completes  functional properties of abstract highly intelligent entities (natural and artificial), i.e. of abstract intelligent agents and, in particular, their explicit TOGA realization in the form of personoids and  personoids organizations.

     For more details see also: personoids paradigms.

    Remarks:

    1. Such properties as consciousness, self-consciousness, meta-reasoning are  consequences of the above presented sufficient and necessary properties of high-intelligent entity.

    2. UMP, as a complete, relative,  recursive and incremental functional structure may be
    applied to the modelling of one intelligent entity  realized as one physical/software system composed with not intelligent elements, as well as, to the modelling of  intelligent systems/organization composed of intelligent elements ( human and artificial).

    3. The IPK and UMP paradigms application enables, for example, the modeling of: human errors, human pathologies, as well as emergency management and  a crisis of an organization

    4. UMP is also a proposal of a standardisation of the terminology and definitions related to the concept management (at present, they are too numerous and either partial or vague)

    5. For example, an application of UMP and  IPK with  the concept social consensus enables formally to distingish leadership and management roles.
    .....

             Management & Leadership: some remarks only

    Leadership is based on a subject-matter knowledge,
    Management should base on knowledge of people.
    Both have to base on objectives/goals.

    [A.M.Gadomski]

     

    Managers have subordinates,

    Leaders have followers

    [David Straker, http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/articles/manager_leader.htm]

     

    Manager is accepted.
    Leader  is desired.
    [G. Ridman]
    Google Search: Management, Leadership, differences - (13 Mar.2006) -- 57.500.000 docs.
                                  high-intelligence - (13 Mar.2006) - 414.000 docs.
    Pages of : META-KNOWLEDGE ENGINEERING SERVER, CAMO, ENEA
    © Copyright, 1996-2003, ENEA. Adam Maria Gadomski. The High-Intelligence and Decisions Research Group local-web on the Meta-Knowledge Engineering Server. Last updating: Mar.2006.

    References to this page: A.M.Gadomski, High-Intelligence Paradigms (2002) : http://erg4146.casaccia.enea.it/HID/HI-def.htm
    11/29/02 18:04:25, Apache/2.0.36 (Win32)