DOCSLIB.ORG

Jonathan Huxley

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Jonathan Huxley An Exploratory Analysis and Synthesis of the Viability of Groups with Salient Social Identities Using Stafford Beer’s VSM Model Jonathan Huxley A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Portsmouth University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2015 ABSTRACT Social groups are a fundamental part of our lives. From early beginnings humans lived in family groups and formed 'tribes' that not only provided protection from the many dangers they faced but by combining their efforts humans learnt that a group could be more than the 'sum of its parts'. Collective action has, and still, provides the basis for much of human activity, while shared knowledge contributes equally to the advancement of humankind. Study into groups has revealed that humans instinctively know when cooperation is the best strategy and that not only is collective action often more efficient and effective than that of independent effort but that groups are good problem solving mechanisms, often making better decisions than individuals through the use of 'collective mindfulness' and a group 'trans-active’ memory. People do not just create a group memory, there is evidence they also ‘become’ the group. As social integration rises, people feel, think, and act more like group members. They automatically associate themselves with the groups that they identify with. Tajfel and Turner’s theory of Social Identity suggests that people not only join groups but take on the ‘group identity’ as their own self-image in a process of ‘depersonalization’. To achieve effective collective action requires more than just 'being' and 'feeling' part of a group. Effective cooperation requires cohesion between group members, good communication and a coherent purpose or goal. Social Identity Theory does not provide evidence of how these mechanisms work other than to identify the formation of group norms. For that we have to turn to cybernetics, the study of 'purposeful action' and Stafford Beer's Viable Systems Model in particular. The Viable Systems Model provides an epistemology for examining the viability of systems. Viability is the ability of systems to achieve cohesion and coherence through autonomy, recursivity and ultimately closure with their environment. This study brings together these two powerful theories to create a more complete picture of purposeful collective action and group membership. By building a Viable Systems Model of salient social groups the research provides a mechanism to understand how individual human social behaviours form and maintain purposeful social groups capable of self- awareness, self-maintenance and the ability to sustain their identity, autonomous from perturbations in the environment. Not every social group is able to maintain viability. Many groups form and expire as the circumstances dictate. Only a few are able to achieve organisational closure from their environment and sustain their identity, This research seeks to identify what is meant by social viability and what factors make some groups achieve it while others do not. It investigates the formation of social groups under different environmental conditions in order to 'tease-out' the invariances that contribute to viability and it tests the validity of the Viable Systems Model of Social Identity Theory developed for the study. In order to answer the research question the study had to address the difficult issue of conducting research on complex social systems and to utilises a process of deduction, induction and abductive reasoning through both analysis and synthesis to achieve its findings. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My most grateful thanks must go to my supervisory team, past and present, from Portsmouth University Business School, namely; James Rowe, Dr Robin Asby, Dr Andreas Hoecht, Professor Ashraf Labib and David Smith, for their support, guidance and encouragement. Special thanks must go to my principal supervisor, James Rowe, firstly for introducing me to Stafford Beer's Viable Systems Model but also for his unequivocal support, his endless knowledge, patience and his guidance throughout. I must thank him for finding my second supervisor Dr Robin Asby whose knowledge of the Viable Systems Model and of Stafford Beer himself has proved invaluable. Although not part of my supervisory team I would like to thank Professor Haslam and his assistant Dr Peters of Exeter University who were kind enough to provide assistance with aspects of Social Identity Theory. I must also thank all the support staff at the Portsmouth University Business School for their tuition, assistance and help with the processes involved, and my fellow students, friends and colleagues for their companionship, patience and understanding. The assistance of the members of SCiO has been invaluable in allowing me to share my ideas. Their positive and constructive comments, support, and wealth of knowledge of cybernetics provided valued help. I am very grateful to the members of all the groups who interrupted busy schedules to complete the survey and conduct the interviews. Their efforts gave insight to the study and allowed my ideas to see fruition. Lastly, without the support of my wife Shona, I could never have achieved this work. Her patience, kindness and encouragement have enabled me to keep faith through to the finish. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract .............................................................................................................................. i Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. ii Table of Contents ................................................................................................................ iii List of Figures ...................................................................................................................... ix List of Tables ....................................................................................................................... xii List of Appendices ............................................................................................................... xiv Declaration .......................................................................................................................... xv Research Ethics Review Checklist ..................................................................................... xvi CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Aim of the Chapter .............................................................................................. 1 1.2 Background ......................................................................................................... 1 1.3 The Study of Social Groups ................................................................................ 2 1.4 Social Identity Theory .......................................................................................... 3 1.5 The Viable Systems Model ................................................................................. 5 1.6 The Suitability of the Viable Systems Model for Social Research ...................... 5 1.7 Research Approach and Design Strategy ........................................................... 6 1.8 Research Aim ...................................................................................................... 8 1.9 Research Question ............................................................................................. 9 1.10 Research Objectives ........................................................................................... 9 1.11 Significance of the Research .............................................................................. 9 1.12 Study Direction - A History of the Research ....................................................... 10 1.13 Guide to the Thesis ............................................................................................. 12 1.13.1 Chapter 1 - Introduction ............................................................................................ 12 1.13.2 Chapter 2 – Literature Review .................................................................................. 12 1.13.3 Chapter 3 – Research Paradigm and Approach ....................................................... 12 1.13.4 Chapter 4 – Research Model .................................................................................... 12 1.13.5 Chapter 5 – Research Methodology. ........................................................................ 12 1.13.6 Chapter 6 – Research Results .................................................................................. 13 1.13.7 Chapter 7 – Synthesis of Components ..................................................................... 13 1.13.8 Chapter 8 – Research Summary ............................................................................... 13 1.13.9 Chapter 9 - Conclusion ............................................................................................. 13 1.14 Summary of Chapter ........................................................................................... 13 CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................... 14 2.1 Aim of Chapter .................................................................................................... 14 2.2 Social Identity Theory .........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cybernetics and Contingency, Codes and Programs : an Account of Social System Thinking in Law and Legal Theory Today
    ORBIT-OnlineRepository ofBirkbeckInstitutionalTheses Enabling Open Access to Birkbeck’s Research Degree output Cybernetics and contingency, codes and programs : an account of social system thinking in law and legal theory today https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/40396/ Version: Full Version Citation: Bryson, Giulia (2019) Cybernetics and contingency, codes and programs : an account of social system thinking in law and legal theory today. [Thesis] (Unpublished) c 2020 The Author(s) All material available through ORBIT is protected by intellectual property law, including copy- right law. Any use made of the contents should comply with the relevant law. Deposit Guide Contact: email CYBERNETICS AND CONTINGENCY, CODES AND PROGRAMS: AN ACCOUNT OF SOCIAL SYSTEM THINKING IN LAW AND LEGAL THEORY TODAY GIULIA BRYSON DOCTORATE OF PHILOSOPHY (PHD) IN LAW 2018 LAW DEPARTMENT, BIRKBECK COLLEGE, UNIVERSITY OF LONDON 1 I hereby declare that the work presented in this thesis is my own, except where explicit reference is made to the work of others. Giulia Bryson 2 ABSTRACT The thesis discusses aspects of current Social Systems Theory, with the main attention devoted both to the level of the compassing social system society and to that of function systems, especially law. Throughout, I refer to the version of social systems theory developed and presented as theory of social autopoiesis in Niklas Luhmann's mature work, while a lim- ited but important part of the thesis will explain this choice and serve as a comparative and genealogical guideline. Central will be the notion and idea of what Luhmann calls a Contingency Formula — term that both func- tions as a problem outline and that indicates how the problem can be solved, within the context of the Legal System.
    [Show full text]
  • Kybernetik in Österreich
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Universität Wien: OJS-Service Kybernetik in Österreich Ein Gespräch zwischen Robert Trappl und Albert Müller1 Albert Müller: Wie kam die Kybernetik nach Österreich? Dieses Thema ist noch wenig behandelt worden, obwohl es sich um eine wichtige Sache handelt. Eine der Besonderheiten besteht darin, dass zu einem bestimmten Zeitpunkt in Österreich Kybernetik selbst in der hohen Politik Aufmerksamkeit fand. Ein früherer öster- reichischer Bundeskanzler, Josef Klaus, hat in einem Buch, das er 1971 als eine Art Rechenschaftsbericht über seine politischen Aktivitäten veröffentlichte,2 unter anderem Folgendes geschrieben: „Die Kybernetisierung der Menschheit kommt mit Riesenschritten auf uns zu.“ In seiner Rolle als Finanzminister erwarb er die erste IBM 360, die er auch selbst feierlich in Betrieb nahm. Josef Klaus bezieht sich in die- sem Text auf Norbert Wiener und W. Ross Ashby, was für einen Politiker doch ziem- lich ungewöhnlich ist. Seine Begeisterung für Kybernetik und Computer brachte ihn schließlich dazu, sich als Privatschüler bei Heinz Zemanek anzumelden, der damals Leiter eines wichtigen Forschungslabors bei IBM in Wien war. Er schreibt relativ genau, wie er als Bundeskanzler um 1968 jeden Morgen vor seinem Erschei- nen im Amt zu Zemanek geht und von ihm Unterricht erhält. Zum Abschluss dieser Aus- und Weiterbildung schreibt der Bundeskanzler Klaus selbst ein kleines FORTRAN-Programm, das auf dem Computer auch zum Laufen gebracht werden konnte. – Das ist eine untypische Geschichte, wie ich glaube, man wird in Öster- reich kaum Politiker finden, die sich ähnlich verhalten haben, und wahrscheinlich wird man auch in anderen Ländern kaum Spitzenpolitiker finden, die sich in mor- gendlicher Frühe einem Privatunterricht in Kybernetik unterziehen.
    [Show full text]
  • Physical Relationships Among Matter, Energy and Information
    Physical Relationships among Matter, Energy and Information Stuart A. Umpleby Department of Management The George Washington University Washington, DC 20052, USA email: [email protected] Published in Systems Research and Behavioral Science Vol. 24, No. 3, 2007, pp. 369-372. An earlier version appeared in Robert Trappl (ed.) Cybernetics and Systems ‘04 Vienna: Austrian Society for Cybernetic Studies, 2004 Physical Relationships Among Matter, Energy and Information Stuart A. Umpleby Department of Management Science The George Washington University Washington, DC 20052, USA email: [email protected] “Information is the difference that makes a difference.” Shannon [1949] defined information as a reduction of Gregory Bateson uncertainty. Bateson [1972] defined information as "that which changes us" or "the difference that makes a Abstract difference." A crucial point is that information, unlike matter and energy, is a function of the observer. [von General systems theorists often refer to matter, Foerster, 1974] For example, the same message may energy and information as fundamental have different meanings for different people. Although categories. The three concepts – matter, energy information requires the perception of a difference, the and information – are related through scientific difference will require a matter or energy carrier (e.g., a laws. Matter and energy relations are more page in a book or sound waves in air). In addition, thoroughly understood than relations involving cognition requires a nervous system. information. At the level of data or signal In 1967 at a panel discussion at the University of “difference” is suggested as a more elementary Illinois I heard Ross Ashby mention Bremermann’s limit. term than “information.” Bremermann’s limit states a relationship between matter and information.
    [Show full text]
  • History 598, Fall 2004
    Meeting Time: The seminar will meet Tuesday afternoons, 1:30-4:30, in Dickinson 211 Week I (9/14) Introduction: Jeremy Campbell, Grammatical Man Evelyn Fox Keller, Refiguring Life: Metaphors of Twentieth-Century Biology Questions and Themes Secondary Lily E. Kay, "Cybernetics, Information, Life: The Emergence of Scriptural Representations of Heredity", Configurations 5(1997), 23-91 [PU online]; and "Who Wrote the Book of Life? Information and the Transformation of Molecular Biology," Week II (9/21) Science in Context 8 (1995): 609-34. Michael S. Mahoney, "Cybernetics and Information Technology," in Companion to the The Discursive History of Modern Science, ed. R. C. Olby et al., Chap.34 [online] Rupture Karl L. Wildes and Nilo A. Lindgren, A Century of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at MIT, 1882-1982, Parts III and IV (cf. treatment of some of the Report: Philipp v. same developments in David Mindell, Between Humans and Machines) Hilgers James Phinney Baxter, Scientists Against Time Supplementary John M.Ellis, Against Deconstruction (Princeton, 1989), Chaps. 2-3 Daniel Chandler, "Semiotics for Beginners" Primary [read for overall structure before digging in to the extent you can] Week III (9/28) Warren S. McCulloch and Walter Pitts, "A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity", Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics 5(1943), 115-33; repr. in Machines and Warren S. McCulloch, Embodiments of Mind (MIT, 1965), 19-39, and in Margaret A. Nervous Systems Boden (ed.), The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence (Oxford, 1990), 22-39. Alan M. Turing, "On Computable Numbers, with an Application to Report: Perrin the Entscheidungsproblem", Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, ser.
    [Show full text]
  • CIUDAD Y PROCESOS URBANOS TITULO: ¿Por Qué AGIL? [*] AUTOR: Niklas Luhmann TRADUCTOR: Ximena J
    VOL: AÑO 5, NUMERO 12 FECHA: ENERO-ABRIL 1990 TEMA: CIUDAD Y PROCESOS URBANOS TITULO: ¿Por qué AGIL? [*] AUTOR: Niklas Luhmann TRADUCTOR: Ximena J. Wolff Reyes SECCION: Homenaje a Parsons TEXTO La obra de Talcott Parsons comienza con "La Estructura de la Acción Social" (1937). Durante toda su vida, del análisis de este libro obtuvo Parsons la seguridad de estar en la tradición de la construcción de teoría sociológica y de continuarla mediante el retorno a sus fundamentos. De los componentes del acto unidad (unit act) resultó para él un espacio combinatorio al que ninguna teoría factible puede plantearse agotar. Por ello, considera Parsons que la teoría estructural-funcionalista debería partir de supuestas estructuras para reducir este "espacio newtoniano" a un formato analizable. Por cierto no fue un programa "estático" (conservador) ni tampoco armónico socialmente, como pronto señaló una crítica ligera; pues en el concepto de estructura yace una limitación de las posibilidades pero no una fijación estática de los límites, como tampoco la suposición de una realidad libre de conflictos. Se exige solamente que cuando se trate de cambios sean cambios resultantes de la estructura y cuando sean conflictos se trate de conflictos resultantes de la estructura. Y de hecho: ¿Cómo podría pensarse la realidad de otra manera? Sin embargo, Parsons mismo superó esta fase de la acentuación de las limitaciones estructurales ya en la segunda mitad de los años cincuenta con la elaboración de una tabla de cruces que vio cada vez más como su propia aportación teórica. [1] En una larga conversación pocos días antes de su muerte me aseguró con insistencia que allí quería poner el énfasis.
    [Show full text]
  • A Short History of Cybernetics in the United States
    Stuart A. Umpleby A Short History of Cybernetics in the United States The Origin of Cybernetics Cybernetics as a field of scientific activity in the United States began in the years after World War II. Between 1946 and 1953 the Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation sponso- red a series of conferences in New York City on the subject of „Circular Causal and Feedback Mechanisms in Biological and Social Systems.“ The chair of the confe- rences was Warren McCulloch of MIT. Only the last five conferences were recorded in written proceedings. These have now been republished.1 After Norbert Wiener published his book Cybernetics in 1948,2 Heinz von Foerster suggested that the name of the conferences should be changed to „Cybernetics: Circular Causal and Feedback Mechanisms in Biological and Social Systems.“ In this way the meetings became known as the Macy Conferences on Cybernetics. In subsequent years cybernetics influenced many academic fields – computer science, electrical engineering, artificial intelligence, robotics, management, family therapy, political science, sociology, biology, psychology, epistemology, music, etc. Cybernetics has been defined in many ways: as control and communication in ani- mals, machines, and social systems; as a general theory of regulation; as the science or art of effective organization; as the art of constructing defensible metaphors, etc.3 The term ‚cybernetics‘ has been associated with many stimulating conferences, yet cybernetics has not thrived as an organized scientific field within American uni- versities. Although a few cybernetics programs were established on U.S. campuses, these programs usually did not survive the retirement or death of their founders. Quite often transdisciplinary fields are perceived as threatening by established disciplines.
    [Show full text]
  • STAFFORD BEER Is an International Consultant in the Management Sciences
    BIOGRAPHIES OF CONTRIBUTORS STAFFORD BEER is an international consultant in the management sciences. For twenty years he was a manager himself, and has held the positions of company director, managing director, and Chairman of the Board. He is currently a director of the British software house, Metapraxis Ltd. In part-time academic appointments, he is visiting professor of cybernetics at Manchester University in the Business School, and adjunct professor of social sciences at Pennsylvania University in the Wharton School, where his previous position was in statistics and operations research. He is President of the World Organization of General Systems and Cybernetics, and holds its Wiener Memorial Gold Medal. His consultancy has covered small and large companies, national and international agencies, together with government-based contracts in some fifteen countries. He is cybernetics advisor to Ernst and Whinney in Canada. Publications cover more than two hundred items, and nine books. He has exhibited paintings, published poetry, teaches yoga, and lists his recreations as spinning wool and staying put in his remote Welsh cottage. Address: Prof.Stafford Beer Cwarel Isaf Pont Creuddyn Llanbedr Pont Steffan Dyfed SA48 8PG UK ERNST VON GLASERSFELD was born in 1917 of Austrian parents, went to school in Italy and Switzerland, briefly studied mathematics in Zuerich and Vienna, and survived the war as a farmer in IrelaMd. In 1948 he joined the research group of Silvio Ceccato who subsequently founded the Center for Cybernetics in Milan. In 1963 he received a contract from the U.S. Air Force Office of Scientific Research for work in computational linguistics, and in 1966 he and his team moved to Athens, Georgia.
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Discovering and Re-Inventing Heinz Von Foerster
    Cybernetics and Human Knowing. Vol. 18, nos. 3-4, pp. 5-16 Foreword: Re-discovering and Re-inventing Heinz von Foerster Karl H. Müller1& Albert Müller2 Heinz von Foerster (November 13, 1911 – October 2, 2002) was a master in inverting and subverting established forms of meaning. Sentences like “The map is the territory” or “Truth is the invention of a liar” have become classical examples of such an inversion and have won considerable popularity. With respect to the word pair of discoveries and inventions Heinz von Foerster pointed out that many instances of discoveries in scientific domains like mathematics or chemistry should rather be qualified as inventions. Inventions place an observer into the center of operations and hold her or him fully accountable whereas discoveries leave an observer largely out of the picture and separate her or him from the results of the discovery-process. Re- discovering or re-inventing seem to be second rate operations at best and reduce the originality and accountability of an observer even more. So why then re-discovering and re-inventing Heinz von Foerster? Using Heinz von Foerster’s subversion and inversion strategy, re-discoveries and re-inventions, much more than discoveries and inventions, produce genuine novelty since they transform a familiar object into a new one. In this sense, the process of re- discovery turns a well-established and embedded domain into something effectively new which is full of potential surprises and unexpected aspects. Similarly, re- inventions open up significantly new forms of utilizations which were inaccessible under the old invention configuration. In fact, one could even propose two innovation theorems (Müllers’ theorems): • Re-discover and you will find radical novelty! (Nr.1) • Re-invent and you will move to genuinely new application fields! (Nr.2) Re-discoveries in science, because of their estrangement of too familiar contexts, transform well-known authors and texts into new challenges for our interpretative understanding.
    [Show full text]
  • Barry Clemson, Editor 314 Shibles Hall University of Maine Orono, ME
    ..... Newsletter of the American Society for Cybernetics Barry Clemson, Editor 314 Shibles Hall University of Maine Orono, ME 04469 207-581-2792 Number 16, July l, 1982 The address of the ASC is:2131 G St.N.W., Washington DC 20052 THIRD ANNUAL MAINE If you plan to fly, call Barry Clemson (h: 207/866-7702; o: 207/ CYBERNETICS FESTIVAL 581-2792). He will suggest what flights to take so someone can meet July 23-26, 1982 you at the airport. Most people will probably plan to arrive at the Barry Clemson airport in Bangor or Portland early in the afternoon an Friday and will leave early in the afternoon on The Third Annual Maine Cybernetics ·--- - Festival is fast approaching. Roger Monday. Tc get the supersaver fare, Conant and I have been Sponsoring make your reservations and buy your these events out of a feeling that tickets at least 14 days in advance. cyberneticians needed a chance to get to know each other. The Festivals Arrangements: The hause is small, are, therefore, events in which but the barn has room for quite a few cyberneticians and their families are people, and there is plenty of space brought tagether under idyllic for tents. Bring a sleeping bag, air conditions and then allowed to self­ mattress and a tent if you like. All organize. Roger and I ensure that participants will be asked to share people have the wherewithal to meet the cost of the food. Last year the as groups, to hold private conversa­ cost was about $15 per person. tvery­ tions, er to play along the coast.
    [Show full text]
  • Editorial Geschichte Der Kybernetik
    Editorial Geschichte der Kybernetik Nicht zum ersten Mal beschäftigt sich die Österreichische Zeitschrift für Geschichts- wissenschaften mit Problemen von Kybernetik, Systemtheorie und Konstrukti- vismus. Und auch diesmal sind es die Unabgeschlossenheit der Fragen und die Vorläufigkeit der möglichen Antworten, die uns faszinieren. Einleitend skizziert Albert Müller den aktuellen Zwischenstand der wissen- schaftsgeschichtlichen Forschungen zu einer Geschichte der Kybernetik. Stuart Umpleby gibt eine hilfreiche Übersicht über die Geschichte der Gründungen und Ausdifferenzierungen kybernetischer Forschung unter verschiedenen Begriffen: Computer science, artificial intelligence, robotics, systems engineering, cybernetics of so cial systems, biofeedback, management cybernetics u. a. Peter Asaro beschäftigt sich mit einem zentralen Thema der Geschichte der Kybernetik in den 1940er und 1950er Jahren: den Leitmotiven, Gehirn-Modellen und Metaphern, die beim Bau der ersten Computer-Maschinen wegweisend waren. Margit Rosen setzt sich mit den künstlerischen Beiträgen des englischen Kybernetikers Gordon Pask ausein- ander. Von MusiColour bis zum Colloquy of Mobiles reicht die von ihr vorgestellte Reihe kunstvoll gebauter und künstlerischer Computer-Maschinen. Rosen macht uns auch mit der Logik von Pasks berühmten Lehr- und Lernmaschinen vertraut. Zwei Gespräche liefern nicht nur Anekdoten zur Geschichte der Kybernetik. Albert Müller spricht mit Robert Trappl, emeritierter Professor für Medizinische Kybernetik und Artificial Intelligence, über die
    [Show full text]
  • Systems Philosophy and Cybernetics
    Systems Philosophy and Cybernetics Nagib Callaos Founding President of the International Institute of Informatics and Systemics (IIIS) Abstract1 The general purpose of this article is to outline the intellectual importance and the pragmatic value of Cybernetics Philosophy. With this orientation, we will try to show the plausibility that Cybernetics, in its essence, is not new but, on the contrary, it seems consubstantial with human nature and, plausibly with Nature itself. Based on this plausibility, we will try to reason why it is intellectually important and pragmatically valuable, to foster reflections oriented to a Philosophy of Cybernetics. Consequently, we will suggest that applying systems philosophy, to be applied to Cybernetic systems, as a species. Additionally, it would be required to identify the differentia specifica of cybernetic systems and, hence, add other predicates to the notion of Cybernetics. This does not mean that we will be suggesting the use of the Aristotelian Definition and adding another definition to the overwhelming number of definitions that already exist. What we are suggesting is to use the Aristotelian notion of ‘definition’, in a more comprehensive context, i.e., not to define but to describe the notion or the idea of Cybernetics. In this context, we suggest the support of ‘Control Philosophy’ as a source to identify the differentia specifica of “cybernetics” in the context of the genus “general system”. This suggestion will emerge as we provide details regarding the con-essential nature of cybernetics to human beings and potential with Nature and its Evolution. Based on the details, we will provide regarding the above paragraph, we will suggest cybernetic relationships that tacitly, implicitly, or explicitly exist between the most important notions; which we will provide as related to the general- purpose briefly described above.
    [Show full text]
  • Luis M. Rocha
    LUIS M. ROCHA Luddy School of Informatics, Computing & Engineering 812-856-1832 • Fax: 812-856-3015 Indiana University e-mail: [email protected] 919 East Tenth Street, Bloomington IN 47408 www: http://informatics.indiana.edu/rocha PERSONAL DATA Luis M. Rocha is Professor of Informatics & Cognitive Science. He is the director of the NSF-NRT Interdisciplinary Training Program in Complex Networks and Systems, director of the Center for Social and Biomedical Complexity, a member of the advisory council of the Indiana University Network Science Institute, and core faculty of the Cognitive Science Program at Indiana University, Bloomington. Dr. Rocha is a Fulbright Scholar and is also Principal Investigator at the Instituto Gulbenkian da Ciencia, and Visiting Professor at the NOVA School of Business and Economics, Portugal. He also has been a Visiting Professor of the Center for Theoretical Physics at the Aix-Marseille University, France and the Champalimaud Foundation, Portugal. RESEARCH INTERESTS Complex networks & systems: collective behavior, computational social science, control and redundancy in complex networks, discrete dynamical systems & automata, evolutionary systems & agent-based modeling, information theory, interdisciplinary and systems science. Computational biology and biomedical informatics: control in systems biology, brain and ecological networks, dynamical models of biochemical regulation, electronic health records and multiomic health, genomic multivariate analysis, information extraction and automatic annotation, literature
    [Show full text]