Uses Deacon’s hierarchy as conceptual background while distinguishing physical dynamics, self-organized pattern formation, and reciprocal constraint closure from software metaphors.
Research documentation: this page interprets a cited research source and defines evidence requirements. It does not claim a released Teleodynamic AI implementation.
Conceptual hierarchy
- Thermodynamic
- Unconstrained or statistically described physical tendency, including dissipation and resource conversion.
- Morphodynamic
- Spontaneous formation of ordered patterns under mutually reinforcing constraints, without necessarily maintaining a beneficiary.
- Teleodynamic
- Coupled constraint-producing processes whose reciprocal organization helps preserve a beneficiary and gives behavior an end-directed interpretation.
Conceptual source
Deacon and García-Valdecasas, A thermodynamic basis for teleological causality (2023) provides conceptual background for constraint-based teleological causality. It does not establish that an algorithm, model, or browser runtime is teleodynamic.
Software caution
CPU cycles, memory allocation, and model graphs can be discussed by analogy, but an analogy is not an implementation proof. A software system should expose the reciprocal constraints, beneficiary, persistence criteria, and resource dynamics before receiving the label.
Scope
This starter page defines the questions, boundaries, evidence, and failure modes that should be recorded before a capability is presented as supported.
Engineering considerations
- Identify the source, version, target environment, and owner.
- Separate observed values from estimates and externally reported values.
- Record trade-offs, unsupported cases, and fallback behavior.
- Link performance statements to a compatible benchmark methodology.
Verification questions
- What exact artifact, revision, backend, and environment were reviewed?
- Which assumptions could change the result?
- Which data should be retained so another engineer can reproduce the conclusion?