But, is a puzzlement!

[From Rick Marken (940531.1745)]

Bill Cunningham (940530.1530) --

Very interesting post; some very puzzling statements. For example:

"To arms! To arms! The British are coming."
This is alerting information, (per Martin Taylor 940530.1700). It
does two things. First, requires the recipient to control for
something that was previously unimportant. In so doing, it
reduces the recipient's degrees of freedom with respect to many
things that could be controlled for.

How does it "do" these things? If I heard this information (rather than read
them) would I start controlling for something previously unimportant?

Moving onward toward a diagram, I envision a set of "course of
action (COA) templates, which if selected will become the primary
reference on the effector side.

Reference for the effector side? Specification for output? Why would
you consider "course of action" templates if you are taking action
in a world that may change substantially while you are taking the
"course of action"?

And thus, a system that _can_ control for reduced uncertainty:

Where is uncertainty perceived in the model? What does the perceptual
function look like that puts out a signal proportional to uncertainty
(this, for me. is the crucial question)? How is the perception of
uncertainty affected by the outputs of the system?

  Reference for action

This was in the diagram. What is a reference for action? Is this one of
the contributions of IT to PCT? It sounds like a very puzzling concept; not
wrong, of course; just puzzling.

While not perfect, this does show a way to deal with uncertainty that does
not appear to violate anything truly fundemental to PCT.

I didn't see any control of uncertainty in the diagram. Situation templates
(STi) were reference signals so I assume that the perceptions controlled
were states of situation templates. I didn't see how the comparison outputs
were related to the "course of action" templates. I also didn't see why the
course of action templates were there at all in a closed loop system -- why
have templates for actions which matter only in terms of their effects on
the perceptual variables?

In fact, if I didn't know better, I would have mistaken the diagram you
drew for that of a "control of output" model of triage. But, of course, it
couldn't be a "control of output" model because you must know, from your
knowledge IT and your reading of Shannon, that behavior is the control if
perception ;->