Changes

Line 10,211: Line 10,211:     
One form of realization lets each element of the object domain <math>O\!</math> correspond to the observed presence of an object in the environment of the systematic agent.  In this interpretation, the object <math>x\!</math> acts as an input datum that causes the system <math>Y\!</math> to shift from whatever sign state it happens to occupy at a given moment to a random sign state in <math>[x]_Y.\!</math>  Expressed in a cognitive vein, <math>{}^{\backprime\backprime} Y ~\operatorname{notes}~ x {}^{\prime\prime}.</math>
 
One form of realization lets each element of the object domain <math>O\!</math> correspond to the observed presence of an object in the environment of the systematic agent.  In this interpretation, the object <math>x\!</math> acts as an input datum that causes the system <math>Y\!</math> to shift from whatever sign state it happens to occupy at a given moment to a random sign state in <math>[x]_Y.\!</math>  Expressed in a cognitive vein, <math>{}^{\backprime\backprime} Y ~\operatorname{notes}~ x {}^{\prime\prime}.</math>
 +
 +
Another form of realization lets each element of the object domain <math>O\!</math> correspond to the autonomous intention of the systematic agent to denote an object, achieve an objective, or broadly speaking to accomplish any other purpose with respect to an object in its domain.  In this interpretation, the object <math>x\!</math> is a control parameter that brings the system <math>Y\!</math> into line with realizing a target set <math>[x]_Y.\!</math>
    
<pre>
 
<pre>
Another form of realization lets each element of the object domain O correspond to the autonomous intention of the systematic agent to denote an object, achieve an objective, or broadly speaking to accomplish any other purpose with respect to an object in its domain.  In this interpretation, the object X is a control parameter that brings the system Y into line with realizing a target set [X]Y.
  −
   
Tables&nbsp;78 and 79 show how the sign relations for A and B can be filled out as finite state processes in conformity with the interpretive principles just described.  Rather than letting the actions go undefined for some combinations of inputs C O and states C S, transitions have been added that take the interpreters from whatever else they might have been thinking about to the SECs of their objects.  In either modality of realization, cognitive or control oriented, the abstract structure of the resulting sign process is exactly the same.
 
Tables&nbsp;78 and 79 show how the sign relations for A and B can be filled out as finite state processes in conformity with the interpretive principles just described.  Rather than letting the actions go undefined for some combinations of inputs C O and states C S, transitions have been added that take the interpreters from whatever else they might have been thinking about to the SECs of their objects.  In either modality of realization, cognitive or control oriented, the abstract structure of the resulting sign process is exactly the same.
 
</pre>
 
</pre>
12,080

edits