Biology and Philosophy 23 (4):475-491 (2008)
|Abstract||I show that gene regulation networks are qualitatively consistent and therefore sufficiently similar to linearly seperable connectionist networks to warrant that the connectionist framework be applied to gene regulation. On this view, natural selection designs gene regulation networks to overcome the difficulty of development. I offer some general lessons about their evolvability that can be learned by examining the generic features of connectionist networks.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Reinhard Blutner (2004). Nonmonotonic Inferences and Neural Networks. Synthese 142 (2):143 - 174.
A. Wendy Russell & Robert Sparrow (2008). The Case for Regulating Intragenic Gmos. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 21 (2).
Paul Smolensky (1987). Connectionist, Symbolic, and the Brain. AI Review 1:95-109.
Brian P. McLaughlin & F. Warfield (1994). The Allure of Connectionism Reexamined. Synthese 101 (3):365-400.
Jonathan Opie & Gerard O'Brien (2006). How Do Connectionist Networks Compute? Cognitive Processing 7 (1):30-41.
Nejat Düzgüneş (1975). On the Theories of Gene Regulation and Differentiation in Eukaryotes. Acta Biotheoretica 24 (3-4).
Roger Sansom (2008). Countering Kauffman with Connectionism: Two Views of Gene Regulation and the Fundamental Nature of Ontogeny. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (2):169-200.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads6 ( #145,458 of 548,984 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,327 of 548,984 )
How can I increase my downloads?