6e992cc0c5
- Rename 'three-pronged' folder to 'knowledge-layers' — prong metaphor
was misleading (implied parallel tines), replaced with epistemic layers
(deductive base, empirical middle, probabilistic oracle — vertical stack)
- Collapse 11 overlapping files into 3 coherent documents:
- knowledge-layers/_index.org: core framework (two engines + one store,
World Model formula, 0-14 layer table, provenance store design,
conflict resolution, cold-start, stage mapping)
- knowledge-layers/practical-implications.org: design-world-aware-of-
physics, 10 powers, Schafmeister existence proof, epistemic transparency
- knowledge-layers/neurological-empirical.org: neural networks in
provenance framework (kept intact)
- Relocate wolfram/mathematica and Schafmeister docs to ideas/viability/
- Integrate into main architecture _index.org:
- Gate: expanded from two vectors (ACL2+LLM) to three (deductive,
provenance/empirical, LLM oracle)
- Autodidactic loop: split into Track 1 (deductive hardening, fast)
and Track 2 (empirical validation, slow, experimental-feedback-driven)
- See also: added Knowledge Layers cross-reference
- Add all-lisp geometry engine note (ideas/lisp-geometry-engine.org) as
concrete illustration of the empirical layer's effect on design work
- Rebuild site: 148 files, 0 errors
41 lines
2.8 KiB
Org Mode
41 lines
2.8 KiB
Org Mode
:PROPERTIES:
|
|
:CREATED: [2026-06-01 Mon]
|
|
:ID: a7b8c9d0-1e2f-3a4b-5c6d-7e8f90abcdef
|
|
:END:
|
|
#+title: ANN vs Neuromorphic vs Symbolic
|
|
#+filetags: :passepartout:architecture:neurosymbolic:math:
|
|
|
|
**ANN vs Neuromorphic vs Symbolic**
|
|
|
|
**Core insight**
|
|
|
|
The gap between ANNs and biology is not substrate (binary vs analog). Both are continuous mathematics running on discrete hardware. The real differences are architectural:
|
|
|
|
1. Memory-binding: ANNs store weights separately from compute (von Neumann bottleneck). Biology co-locates weight and signal at the synapse.
|
|
2. Local vs global learning: ANNs need a global error signal backpropagated through every layer. Biology uses purely local plasticity (STDP) — each synapse adjusts based on its own pre/post partners.
|
|
3. Time: Biology is asynchronous, continuous, with rich temporal dynamics. ANNs are synchronous — everything computed in lockstep. Recurrence is an awkward addition.
|
|
4. One substrate, many functions: A biological synapse does memory, signal propagation, temporal integration, and plasticity in one structure. ANNs separate these across different passes and optimizers.
|
|
|
|
**When each mathematics is appropriate**
|
|
|
|
| Mathematics | Naturally good at | Awkward at |
|
|
+------------+-------------------+------------+
|
|
| ANN / gradient descent | Smooth function approximation, interpolation, pattern completion from dense data | Symbolic reasoning, exact constraints, sparse data, multi-step verification |
|
|
| Neuromorphic / spiking dynamics | Temporal pattern recognition, event-driven control, low-power always-on sensing | Complex multi-step planning, precise arithmetic, storing large lookup tables |
|
|
| Symbolic / deduction | Exact reasoning, proof, constraint satisfaction, verifiable behavior | Learning from raw data, generalization, handling noisy inputs |
|
|
|
|
**How Passepartout uses all three**
|
|
|
|
- LLM (ANN on GPU) handles the noisy real world — language, vision, imperfect input
|
|
- Screamer (symbolic constraint search on CPU) handles combinatorial reasoning — "find valid configuration"
|
|
- ACL2 (deductive proof) handles the verifiable kernel — "prove this decision follows from rules"
|
|
- P150 (RISC-V parallel accelerator, in-between arch) handles ambient awareness, parallel dispatch, anomaly detection
|
|
|
|
Each mathematics where it belongs. The failure mode of both pure ANN and pure symbolic approaches is forcing one mathematics to do what the other is better at.
|
|
|
|
**The neuromorphic opportunity**
|
|
|
|
A neuromorphic chip (Loihi-level) would add unsupervised temporal learning — learning daily rhythms, behavioral patterns, and detecting deviations without training, labels, or LLM involvement. This is the difference between responding to commands and anticipating needs.
|
|
|
|
But the P150 gets 80% there with programmable cores controlled directly, without waiting for neuromorphic hardware to mature.
|