VS: Control Is

[from eetu pikkarainen 2017-01-29]

Thank you Fred, good questions!

I thik it depends on how and how strictly we define “control”.

We can say that control is somet​hing in the loop (which requires the whole loop) or it is something which the loop does or which happens every where around the loop.

I think this whole thing at the moment in the next way:

The existence, life, action and wellbeing of the living organism depends mostly on on thing: its relationship with its environment - not the environment as such.

What the organism perceives (experiences, senses) is just parts of that relationship.

The organism has to (try to) keep the relationship in such nature and such limits that its life (existence, action) can continue.

The organism “controls” its perceptions i.e. checks their compatibility with its internal goals.

Partly its goal are determined by its internal (homeostatic) structure and the requirements of the continuation of its life, and partly it can “set” goals by itself.

According to the results of the “control” it “adjusts” its output (doings, behavior).

By its behavior it “affects” parts of its environment when it tries to “regulate” its relationship to the environment: the property, CEV, target etc. which caused the original goal-incompatible perception.

When some disturbation again changes the relationship so that perception becomes back unwanted, the new “regulation” should “cancel” the effect of disturbance. When the organism learns more it could be even able to “predict”
some distributions and cancel them in advance.

So the loop is not symmetric and homogeny, there happens different events in different places.

But in everyday speech we often call many of these or even all of these “control”. And I have a feeling that this happens also in these discussions?

(Note, I am not engineer, not English speaker and not even a psychologist, so these terms can be selected all wrong!)

···

Eetu


Lähettäjä: Fred Nickols fred@nickols.us
Lähetetty: 29. tammikuuta 2017 16:51
Vastaanottaja: ‘Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)’
Aihe: Control Is

[From Fred Nickols (2017.01.29.0950 ET)]

As Admiral Dewey said, “You may fire when ready, Gridley.” (After taking a look at the attachment)

Regards,

Fred Nickols, Managing Partner

My Objective is to Help You Achieve Yours

DISTANCE
CONSULTING LLC

“Assistance at a Distance”

[from eetu pikkarainen 2017-01-30]

Still one more descriptive term I would like to consider:

By perceiving some aspects of the relationship between the organism and environment, the perceptual input function “measures” those aspects, i.e. defines a representative scalar value for them.

BTW I found out that I wrote “disturbance” wrongly in two ways!

···

Eetu Pikkarainen


Lähettäjä: Fred Nickols fred@nickols.us
Lähetetty: 29. tammikuuta 2017 23:06
Vastaanottaja: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Aihe: RE: Control Is

[From Fred Nickols (2017.01.29.1605 ET)]

What you say makes perfect sense to me, Eetu. Thanks for commenting.

Fred Nickols

From: Eetu Pikkarainen [mailto:eetu.pikkarainen@oulu.fi]
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 3:36 PM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: VS: Control Is

[from eetu pikkarainen 2017-01-29]

Thank you Fred, good questions!

I thik it depends on how and how strictly we define “control”.

We can say that control is somet​hing in the loop (which requires the whole loop) or it is something which the loop does or which happens every where around the loop.

I think this whole thing at the moment in the next way:

The existence, life, action and wellbeing of the living organism depends mostly on on thing: its relationship with its environment - not the environment as such.

What the organism perceives (experiences, senses) is just parts of that relationship.

The organism has to (try to) keep the relationship in such nature and such limits that its life (existence, action) can continue.

The organism “controls” its perceptions i.e. checks their compatibility with its internal goals.

Partly its goal are determined by its internal (homeostatic) structure and the requirements of the continuation of its life, and partly it can “set” goals by itself.

According to the results of the “control” it “adjusts” its output (doings, behavior).

By its behavior it “affects” parts of its environment when it tries to “regulate” its relationship to the environment: the property, CEV, target etc. which caused the original goal-incompatible
perception.

When some disturbation again changes the relationship so that perception becomes back unwanted, the new “regulation” should “cancel” the effect of disturbance. When the organism learns more it could
be even able to “predict” some distributions and cancel them in advance.

So the loop is not symmetric and homogeny, there happens different events in different places.

But in everyday speech we often call many of these or even all of these “control”. And I have a feeling that this happens also in these discussions?

(Note, I am not engineer, not English speaker and not even a psychologist, so these terms can be selected all wrong!)

Eetu


Lähettäjä: Fred Nickols fred@nickols.us
Lähetetty: 29. tammikuuta 2017 16:51
Vastaanottaja: ‘Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)’
Aihe: Control Is

[From Fred Nickols (2017.01.29.0950 ET)]

As Admiral Dewey said, “You may fire when ready, Gridley.” (After taking a look at the attachment)

Regards,

Fred Nickols, Managing Partner

My Objective is to Help You Achieve Yours

DISTANCE
CONSULTING LLC

“Assistance at a Distance”

[from eetu pikkarainen 2017-01-30 b]

Rich and Fred,

I’d like to comment the first question:

All behavior of any variable is caused by something, and the difference between them depends on how they are caused.

The only controlled variable is the perceptual signal and its behavior is in a way caused (at least) twice. First it is caused by the CEV (or what ever it should be called) in the initial perceiving event. Then it is caused again by the by the same CEV after
the output has caused some change in it. (And so on, around and around the loop.) If the control succeeds well then the behaviour of the controlled variable is such that its value approaches the value of the reference value and stays near it. We cannot compare
its behaviour in this relation to other variables because only it has a reference value. For the CEV we can infer a “target” value to which it approaches if control succeeds.

···

Eetu


Lähettäjä: Richard Marken rsmarken@gmail.com
Lähetetty: 29. tammikuuta 2017 23:39
Vastaanottaja: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Aihe: Re: Control Is

[From Rick Marken (2017.01.29.1340 PST)]

Fred Nickols (2017.01.29.0950 ET)–

FN: As Admiral Dewey said, “You may fire when ready, Gridley.” (After taking a look at the attachment)

RM: Rather than “fire” at this I’ll just suggest a couple things to think about that might lead you to revise this treatise:

  1. What is the difference between the behavior of a variable that is caused and that of a variable that is controlled?

2, What is the difference between the engineer’s and the psychologist’s perspective on the phenomenon of control?

Best

Rick

"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.”
–Antoine de Saint-Exupery