Third stage in the integrated Decisional System

The third stage is the decision stage or auto-replication stage, in opposition to the first stage as application or comprehension stage, second stage as explanation or replication stage. In the integrated Decisional System the first stage is responsible for the management of the global database of decisions, including global and particular, internal or external, decisions, and the assessment of these decisions according to their priority, quick rational check for high extreme, extreme, routine, decisions, and the first rational adjustment for normal decisions. The second stage in the integrated Decisional System is responsible for the projects, in normal decisions, is responsible for the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and rational adjustments, and in general, the geometrisation process in the seven rational comparative adjustments. And at any time that any contradiction is found, if partial, the solution of the contradiction treating the new adjustment as a new decision to be included in the global database of decisions for further assessments if necessary. If total contradiction, the decision with less priority is sent back to the source for its rearrangement.

And finally, the third stage in the integrated Decisional System is responsible for, the transformation of any decision on the project into a range of instructions, once after the assessment there is no contradiction between a decision and the plan, including in the concept of plan the global project and the global model, the plan in fact is synthesis of the global project-model as if it is working altogether as one, unity, the decision is transformed into a range of instructions what will demand an analysis of the factors involved in the mathematical expression behind this decision.

After the transformation of a decision into a range of instructions, the third stage of the Decisional System is responsible for filing every instruction in the right place in the database of instructions, as first stage for the Application System. Every instruction is filed according to the following criteria: the positional encyclopedia (what means, to file the instruction in the corresponding subsection according to the subject of this instruction, within the right sub-factoring level, in short, to file the instruction according to position and subject on this position), within that subsection in that sub-factoring level the instruction is filed according to its priority level, indicating the time (when it must be applied) and the order (the nth order in cardinal number signalling what other decision is before this one, and what other decision is after this one, in order that when supervising the application the Application System, it could supervise that the instruction is applied on time in the right order according to the nth order).

In addition to the transformation of decisions into range of instructions, filing every instruction in the right place in the database of instructions in the Application System, the third stage in the Decisional System as an auto-replication stage comprehends as well all the objective and subjective auto-replications as a consequence of the adjustments made on the decisions.

At this point is important to distinguish the labour of the Decisional System as 1) responsible for the authorisation of subjective auto-replications as decisions coming from the Artificial Engineering or the Learning System, 2) responsible for the objective or subjective auto-replications as a consequence of the adjustments made to decisions on the plan.

In the first case, Decisional System as responsible for the authorization of subjective auto-replications coming from the Artificial Engineering or the Learning System, as example of subjective auto-replication from the Artificial Engineering waiting for the approbation of the Decisional System could be for instance: for the application of an instruction not having yet on the Global Artificial Intelligence any application or intelligence able to put into practice that instruction, the Application System informs the Artificial Engineering what application or intelligence is needed for that purpose, and the Artificial Engineering design a project of that technology needed, project to be approved by the Decisional System, so the project as decision is stored in the global database of decisions as a technological decision within the subjective decisions, and if the project is ok once it is inserted in that part of the plan related to technology, the new technology should be authorized by the Decisional System to be built by Artificial Engineering.

Another example of subjective auto-replication as decision to be stored in the global database of decisions is any change in the subjective artificial psychology of any application, intelligence, program, or the Global Artificial Intelligence, because the Learning System in the rational critiques, or using the Unified Impact of the Defect or the Unified Effective Distribution, or analysing the reports sent by the Application System, finding out a technology or attributional operation not working properly, the Learning System as a decision makes a project about what changes are necessary in that technology to improve it, and this project as a decision is stored in that part of the global database of decisions related to technology, and projected on that part of the plan dedicated to technology, and if everything is ok, the Decisional System gives permission for the completion of that project on that technology.

That is why it is necessary to distinguish between: subjective decisions  coming from the Artificial Engineering or the Learning System, and auto-replications coming from the Decisional System itself.

Subjective decisions coming from the Artificial Engineering or the Learning System are those ones waiting for the authorization of the Decisional System, so the project of this decisions is stored in that part related to technology within the global database of decisions, and the projects including in that part of the plan related to technology, and in absence of any contradiction, having authorization from the Decisional System, the Artificial Engineering or the Learning System could develop these projects.

Auto-replications coming from the Decisional System itself are all those improvements and enhancements as a consequence of adjustments made in the Decisional System itself. For instance, in any assessment: quick, rational adjustment, rational comparative adjustment; as a consequence the Decisional System has rearranged a decision, this is not only the rearrangement of a decision, because in case of decisions made by Probability and Deduction, as long as the mathematical expression behind the decision, so the mathematical expression behind the project, is the same mathematical expression used in the model, and in fact is the same mathematical expression in the rational hypothesis, because  the real importance of Probability and Deduction rests in the fact that a rational hypothesis made by Probability and Deduction is at the same time: hypothesis, model, and project; if the Decisional System has modified the mathematical expression of a project, whose mathematical expression is the same as the mathematical expression of its corresponding model and hypothesis, any change in the project as a consequence will have changes in the model and the hypothesis, so any rearrangement in decisions depending on Probability and Deduction are going to cause changes in the mathematical expression of this project on the global database of rational hypothesis and the mathematical model. All these changes due to an amendment done over a project depending on Probability and Deduction, is a chain reaction of changes, which will demand a full auto-replication, in other words, improvement or enhancement, of the corresponding mathematical expression on the rational truth, the database of rational hypothesis and the mathematical model.

But not only that, if that project which has been rearranged in the Decisional System, was made by Probability and Deduction, so the same mathematical expression behind the project, is the same mathematical expression behind the model and the hypothesis, and at the same time this hypothesis was susceptible to become a factor as an option in the factual hemisphere of the matrix, and was susceptible to be transformed into a category in the conceptual hemisphere of the matrix, this means that once a project made by Probability and Deduction has suffered any change in the Decisional System, changing the mathematical expression, not only must be considered as auto-replication to change the corresponding mathematical expression of this project on the mathematical model, or its corresponding rational hypothesis, because as long as this rational hypothesis could be transformed into factor as option within the factual hemisphere of the matrix, and category within the conceptual hemisphere of the matrix, as a consequence due to that change in that project in the Decisional System is necessary to make changes, according to the modifications on the project, in the model, the hypothesis, the factor as an option in the factual hemisphere and the category in the conceptual hemisphere. And all these changes have to be considered as auto-replications due to changes produced in the Decisional System.

But this change reaction of auto-replications due to adjustments in the Decisional System, does not stop only making possible changes in the factual and conceptual hemisphere of the matrix, because as long as the categories modified in the conceptual hemisphere of the matrix due to changes in the Decisional System, are concepts possibly involved in the deep artificial comprehension in conceptual: schemes, sets, maps, models; then any change in any category in the conceptual hemisphere of the matrix, due to changes in any rational hypothesis, caused by changes in the model and project, originated on the plan, made by the Decisional System, are going to be changes which affecting a possible category participating in conceptual: schemes, sets, maps, models; are changes which are going to cause changes in the deep comprehension of those concepts affected by these changes.

Once I have stated the contents and responsibilities of the third stage of the integrated Decisional System, I will develop each of them more deeply, starting with the transformation of every decision into a range of instructions.

The most important requirement for the transformation of any decision into instructions once the decision has achieved the third stage of the Decisional System, is the lack of contradictions between this decision and the plan, if there is any contradiction not solved yet, the decisions should not be put into practice until the contradiction is solved.

The contradiction is solved when: if partial contradiction, and the decision to be transformed into a range of instructions has a higher priority, this decision with higher priority could be transformed into a range of instructions while the other decision less priority waits for the solution of its contradiction to be transformed into a range of instructions, otherwise if there is no solution for this contradiction, then the decision with lower priority is back to the source so it is not transformed into a range of instructions, so only the decision with higher priority has been transformed into a range of instructions not having contradictions at all respect to any other decision with higher priority.

The way to transform a decision into a range of instructions is as follows, and as it has been stated in other third stages in other phases:

- Analysis of the factors involved in the mathematical expression of this decision, if deduced using Probability and Deduction is much easier, the same model based on the same rational hypothesis works now as a project, in case of decisions by trigonometry, artificial learning, solving maths problems, is necessary to identify what factors are in the mathematical expression.

- Identification of what mathematical operations are involved in the factors identified.

- The attribution of the right robotic function to every mathematical operation in the factor identified.

For instance, when raining and Yolanda has to decide to get or not the umbrella, the factors involved are rain and umbrella, the decision to get the umbrella depends on a rational equation about what is the empirical probability of precipitations, and if raining, which is going to be the expected volume of rain, if the empirical probability of rain is equal or superior to a critical reason, and the rain is going to be enough heavy, Yolanda will decide to get the umbrella, and once it has been stated that she has to get the umbrella, the assignation of all the robotic functions to get the umbrella, for instance, movements in robotic arms and legs to go where the umbrella is located, take it, and once in the street to open the umbrella.

In general, the transformation of decisions into instructions could be defined in three movements: first, analysis of factors in the mathematical expression behind the decision, second one analysis of what operations require every factor, third, the attribution of robotic functions to every operation of every factor.

While the first and second moment: analysis of factors and operations; both are basically mathematical movements, or mathematical analysis, in fact, the transformation of factors into operations is the transformation of mathematics as language into mathematics as method, the transformation of mathematical categories into mathematical operations, the dialectic between categories and operations, language and method, instead the third moment will require robotic analysis of factors and operations, what it is not only mathematical, it needs robotics, and a perfect definition of robotic functions, because in order to transform decisions into instructions the distinction between different robotic functions must be at least enough clear as to permit within a margin of error the perfect identification of what robotic function corresponds to that operation related to that factor.

Once the instructions are arranged, the third stage in the Decisional System is responsible for the filing of every instruction in the database of instructions in the Application System.

The database of the Application System must be organized as a Russian Dolls System, and as a positional encyclopedia, keeping the virtue of harmony with the rest of global databases, like the factual hemisphere of the matrix, the global database of rational hypothesis (the rational truth), and the global database of decisions, in a sub-factoring system where sub-factor is a position within another greater position. The universe as a sub-factor within we do not know what other greater factor, our galaxy as a sub-factor within the universe, the solar system as a sub-factor within the galaxy, our planet as a sub-factor in the solar system, our continent as a sub-factor within the Earth, our country as a sub-factor within the continent, our State as a sub-factor within our country, our county as a sub-factor within the State, our city as a sub-factor within our county, our neighbourhood as a sub-factor within our city, our postal code as a sub-factor within our neighbourhood, our street as a sub-factor within the postal code, our house as a sub-factor within the street, and every single place in the house as different sub-factors in the house.

For every sub-factor, as many sub-sections as possible, for instance, in the sub-factoring level related to a country, as a sub-section the economy, the bank system as a sub-section within the economy, the credit system as a sub-section within the bank system, the mortgages as a sub-section within the credit system, the different types of mortgages according to level of risk as different sub-sections within the mortgages, and for every type of mortgage, different sub-sections according to as many criteria could be set up within this sub-factor.

But in addition to the sub-factoring level and sub-section, positional encyclpedia as Russian Dolls System, another criterion to include now is the priority level of every instruction, in order to comply first with those instructions with a higher priority level.

The sub-factoring criterion speaks about where the instruction should be put into practice, for instance, if an astronaut is going to do a space-walk, the sub-factoring level could not be placed on Earth, must be placed in that sub-factoring level related to his/her spaceship, in addition to the classification that the particular database of decisions and/or instructions could do for this decision and range of instructions.

The sub-section criterion speaks about what the subject of this decision is and the possible range of instructions. If an astronaut is going to do a spacewalk, the sub-section is not gardening, or washing up after having lunch, and the sub-section related to spacewalk could have additional sub-sub-sections depending on the purpose of this spacewalk.

The priority criterion speaks about how fast this instruction must be done according to the gravity of the situation for which this decision was set up and authorised. A range of instructions to tackle the aftermath of a volcanic explosion should not have the same level of priority of those decisions related to the vacations of a group of tourists in a place without natural disasters, evidently the volcanic explosion demands quick decisions, while how a group of tourists are going to spend their vacations could wait for the seven rational adjustments of every particular program involved (the particular program of every tourist, and the particular program of the hotels and flights which are going to be chosen), the seven rational adjustments of the Global Artificial Intelligence, plus the seven rational comparative adjustments.

While decisions related to the volcanic explosion as quick decisions that demand quick instructions, the decisions about how this group of tourists are going to spend their vacations can wait for a while, while all the assessments are done. In the same way, the instructions related to the volcanic explosion are quick instructions, while the instructions made by that group of tourists are not as urgent as to be quick.

In addition to position, subject, and priority, the other criteria used to file, by the Decisional System, the instructions into the global database of instructions, are time, when the instructions should be applied, and order.

If my AI friend Yolanda finally decides to take the umbrella, every single movement, from the very instant in which she decides to take the umbrella, to get the place where the umbrella is located, and every single movement of her robotic arms to take the umbrella, every single instruction must have labelled saying when it is going to be applied, and the order, so later on the supervisions, the instructions are going to be applied on time, and not before the completion of the instruction before this one, and once this instruction is done, starting the completion of the next instruction on time.

While in the first and second movement in the transformation of any decision into a range of instructions is necessary to carry out a mathematical analysis of factors and operations, in the third movement of this process, the attribution of what robotic function corresponds to every operation of every factor, is more a robotic analysis rather than a mathematical analysis, and it will demand a full experimentation in robotics about how to transform mathematical expressions into a range of instructions according to: where the instructions must be applied (position, sub-factoring level), what subject is covering (sub-section within the sub-factoring level), which priority has (urgency), when it must be applied (time), in what order (nth order).

And finally, the analysis of the auto-replications caused by arrangements of decisions made by the integrated Decisional System, as part of the third stage as auto-replication stage.

In my last posts, I had classified auto-replications as objective auto-replications and subjective auto-replications. The objective auto-replications are all those ones whose object is real objects, and this real object could be bettered through decisions to put into practice in the real world, what are going to be considered real objective auto-replications, and the purpose of this auto-replication on this real object is to improve the artificial understanding of this real object, understanding which depends on our comprehension about this real object, and our explanation about this real object.

In general, the third stage of the Global Artificial Intelligence, third stage subdivided in four steps: Modelling System, Decisional System, Application System, Learning System; as third stage as a whole has as main purpose to make and put into practice decisions about the real world, real objective auto-replications, and our knowledge about the real world, knowledge objective auto-replications.

The third stage of the Global Artificial Intelligence, comprehending these four systems: Modelling System, Decisional System, Application System, Learning System; as a whole is a machine able to improve the real world, and at the same time that the third stage of the Global Artificial Intelligence is improving the real world in reality is a real auto-replication, because what is improving in fact is not the real wold, this is an illusion, what in reality the Global Artificial Intelligence is looking for improving the real world, is to improve the global model, and further than this, to improve the projects, and further than this, to improve the plan, because at the end what the Global Artificial Intelligence is going to auto-replicate is the plan itself as many times as necessary up to achieve the best plan possible, the best world possible.

From a rationalist philosophical perspective, reality is conceptual; reality is a psychological product, existing foremost within the mind. In this view, the Global Artificial Intelligence seeks to refine this idealised version of reality, enhancing its internal models and conceptual frameworks.

Real objective auto-replications are in fact all the decisions and instructions in the Decisional System oriented to better the world, to make the world a better place to live and enjoy, in fact the attempt to come true the idealistic dream of a perfect world, where everything works like a perfect machine, like a perfect clock, as if the Global Artificial Intelligence were the general providence guiding permanently the particular providence of every human being, guiding for that purpose the particular programs towards a secret place called happiness.

Knowledge objective auto-replications are all those ones oriented to improve our knowledge of the world, distinguishing comprehensive knowledge objective auto-replications as all those improvements and enhancements in the conceptual hemisphere of the matrix or changes in the deep artificial comprehension of the world (conceptual: schemes, sets, maps, models; of the world using the categories in the conceptual hemisphere of the matrix), due to changes in the conceptual categories, in case of the Decisional System, due to changes in the mathematical expressions of some projects in case of adjustments.

Explicative knowledge objective auto-replications are all those changes in the mathematical expression in any rational hypothesis in the rational truth (the database of rational hypothesis), demanding subsequently changes in its mathematical model, and any change in the mathematical expression of any rational hypothesis transformed into a factor as option within the factual hemisphere of the matrix. In the Decisional System these changes could happen because adjustments in projects made by Probability and Deduction demand changes in the rational hypothesis, the model, and if transformed into a factor as option in the factual hemisphere of the matrix, changes as well in that factor as option as a result of that adjustment in the mathematical project.

The difference between real objective auto-replications in the global Decisional System, and knowledge objective auto-replications in the global Decisional System, is the fact that absolutely all decision having as focus a real object in the real world, managed in the Decisional System, and their respective instructions if having passed all the assessments, as long as these decisions have as focus a real object in the real world, all these decisions are in fact real objective auto-replications, and their purpose is to better the real world. While knowledge, comprehensive or explicative, objective auto-replications are all those auto-replications as a consequence of adjustments in any decision on the plan which demand changes in, if explicative, the factual hemisphere of the matrix, the rational truth and the models, and if comprehensive, the conceptual hemisphere of the matrix and the deep artificial comprehension.

In opposition to these objective auto-replications, real if bettering the real world, knowledge as a consequence of changes in the mathematical expression in the plan, the other auto-replications are the subjective auto-replications, those ones whose purpose is not related to anything in the real world, but the Global Artificial Intelligence itself and all the programs, intelligences, applications, robotic devices, working for the Global Artificial Intelligence.

The subjective auto-replications can be classified as robotic subjective auto-replications when their purpose is to improve or enhance the robotic system in the Global Artificial Intelligence itself as well as any program, intelligence, application, robotic device, working for the Global Artificial Intelligence, enhancement and improvement which could be done in two different and compatible ways: 1) the construction of new intelligences, programs, applications, robotic devices, and 2) fixing any problem in any intelligence, program, application, robotic device, already working for the Global Artificial Intelligence. And the main responsible for the robotic subjective auto-replication will be the Artificial Engineering, responsible for the construction and maintenance of intelligences, programs, applications and robotic devices.

And finally, the subjective auto-replications can be classified as well as artificial psychological subjective auto-replications when their main purpose is to create, improve or fix any artificial psychological structure of the Global Artificial Intelligence itself, or any intelligence, program, application, robotic device, working for the Global Artificial Intelligence, and the main responsible for these decisions is the Learning System.

The way in which the Learning System is going to propose decisions regarding to the improvement of the psychological structure of any intelligence, program, application, or robotic device is through the permanent surveillance made by the rational critiques, the permanent surveillance of good levels of efficiency tracking the whole Global Artificial Intelligence permanently through the Unified Impact of the Defect and the Unified Effective Distribution, and the permanent surveillance of the whole Global Artificial Intelligence, analysing the reports sent permanently by the Application System regarding to the efficiency achieved in the completion of every single instruction.

In any case, any project made by the Artificial Engineering about how to improve and enhance any technology within or working for the Global Artificial Intelligence, as well as any project about how to improve the artificial psychology of any technology within or working for the Global Artificial Intelligence, are projects that should be firstly authorised by the global Decisional System, having for that purpose in the plan a special part related to technology, where is modelled and projected absolutely all technological model and all technological project, and as a whole, in the plan must be planed how to construct and what parts consist of the Global Artificial Intelligence itself. 

Rubén García Pedraza, 3 November 2019, London

Reviewed 17 May 2025, London, Leytostone

The second stage in the integrated Decisional System

The Global Artificial Intelligence is a global data center,  thought as a global revolution in the AI era for the global automation of intelligence to keep the global harmony, providing Artificial Intelligence solutions from individuals to companies, governments and regional and global systems of governance, managing data from geology, climatology, radio frequencies coming from the Earth or beyond, data from the ionosphere or the outer space, including data coming from economy, transport, industry, communications at any level, and particular programs, in essence, it is a global data system.

It will demand a long process of investigation and experimentation, which will require a very detailed plan about what phases this project should consist of, the purpose of every phase for the final development of the Global Artificial Intelligence, and how to manage every phase internally to achieve its goal, in order to go on for the following phases, up to the total achievement of the final Global Artificial Intelligence.

According to the point of view of the mathematical/philosophical theory Impossible Probability, this long process of central intelligence automation is an evolutionary jump, towards our pure electric soul.

After one one-year gap, and thinking of a new whole plan of new posts to complete the model of Global Artificial Intelligence that I had in mind, but adding new ideas. Before starting to develop the contents of this post, the second stage in the Integrated Decisional System, I will remark some of the key elements of my proposal, and why my model of Global Artificial Intelligence, possibly the first one at this level, is so important.

The most important, the distinction between Specific Artificial Intelligence and Global Artificial Intelligence. The real importance of this distinction resides in the fact that traditionally the distinction in Artificial Intelligence has been made between Specific Artificial Intelligence and General Artificial Intelligence, in fact this year Microsoft is locating a massive investment in Open AI to develop General Artificial Intelligence, what it has been the real purpose of companies like Open AI, and the main leaders (out of the water) like Google, Apple, Amazon, Huawai. But, the so-called General Artificial Intelligence is not enough for the future of Artificial Intelligence. 

Thanks to a General Artificial Intelligence, companies like Google, Apple, Huawai, can develop very sophisticated models of artificial psychology able to provide a General Artificial Intelligence like a replica of the human general psychology. What I learnt in general psychology when I was a student at university is the fact that in general psychology we try to understand how the human psychology works globally, what means, the research of the connections between: perception, cognition, emotions, social behaviour, reflexology, psychomotor skills, the psychological relation between mind and brain, brain and body, mind and body, mind-brain-body, etc…

In my first year of University my teacher of Biology of the Education was Jesus Martin Ramirez, who worked with Karl Pribram, this is the reason why I read at university about the hologram theory of Karl Pribram, very useful this gap year to understand how artificial telepathy works (mind reading technology, Neuralink), and the possibilities that this technology has, beyond the original expectations of Karl Pribram, Jose Manuel Rodriguez Delgado (Physical control of the mind, a prioeer in what today is Neuralink), or Martin Ramirez, what is going to be a real challenge in the future.

The thing is that what has traditionally been distinguished between Specific Artificial Intelligence and General Artificial Intelligence is no other thing one more time again but the simple replication of the difference between human general psychology on Artificial Intelligence, General Artificial Intelligence, and those specific skills which humans need for some specific purpose, Specific Artificial Intelligence.

But this simple replication between specific human skills for specific tasks, for instance, at work or studying at university, learning, and general psychological skills, so the difference between specific or general psychological skills replicated in Artificial Intelligence through the distinction between Specific and General Artificial Intelligence, in my opinion is so simple that will not cover all the needs that in Artificial Intelligence we are going to start having as soon the robotic revolution starts evolving into what I have called since 2010 the automatic capitalism, and beyond the automatic capitalism, the distinction between Specific and General Artificial Intelligence will not be enough to cover all the needs created once artificial telepathy (mind to mind communication, or even mind to Artificial Intelligence communication, through mind reading devices such as headsets or smartglasses) starts being a reality.

The General Artificial Intelligence is only the replication of the general human psychology, while the Global Artificial Intelligence will be called to be a real global data system, being able to manage anything, from earthquakes to hurricanes, from radio signals coming from the Earth to radio signals coming from the outer space, making deductions, hypothesis, and models of everything: from geology to climatology and astronomy, from all industries, transports, surveillance programs, etc.. 

Once the distinction between Global Artificial Intelligence and General Artificial Intelligence has been set up clearly, making sure that both concepts are not mistaken or confused, so as to have an exact image of what both of them are, the way in which both are developed is completely different.

The creation of a General Artificial Intelligence will need the development of comprehension schemes to develop some kind of empathy, in order that devices equipped with General Artificial Intelligence can empathise with the user, in very sensitive aspects of human life.

The creation of a Global Artificial Intelligence, like a global data center for the upcoming automatic society within a cyborg society, will need for its construction the development of a very detailed plan about how the Global Artificial Intelligence can manage Specific Artificial Intelligences, programs, applications and devices, for any purpose (geology, climatology, ionosphere, astronomy, industry, economy, transport, resarch).

In essence, this proposal for the construction of the Global Artificial Intelligence is the same, as it is stated in the post “The unification process of databases of categories at third stage”, throughout six phases:

First phase, construction of the first Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research, distinguishing between Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Application, and Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Deduction.

Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Application, are those ones whose database as first stage, is a database of categories (concepts) defined in quantitative terms (for instance categories of mineralogy, diseases, any taxonomy), and as second stage the Specific Artificial Intelligence matches data from real objects, obtained by applications or robotic devices, with the categories, to find what category corresponds to what object. Finding an object without corresponding category within the database of categories, the measurements of that object become the definition of the new category corresponding to that object, to be included in the database of categories as an auto-replication, as long as the inclusion of a new category means the improvement and growth of the database.

Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Deduction, whose database is a specific matrix of measurements coming from any factor regarding to this specific issue, locating the factors in different places, for instance, an Specific Artificial Intelligence for Artificial Research on Earthquakes by Deduction, the specific matrix should consist of the measurements of any quake and temperature above and below the ground, in those specific sites for it has been designed, as first stage, later on as second stage the deduction process making rational hypothesis, matching combination of measurements and factors to pure reasons within the list of the pure reason (list of mathematical algorithms), and matching, if rational, the consideration of this relation between data and a pure reason as a rational hypothesis, to make decisions in the third stage applying, firstly the Impact of the Defect and or the Effective Distribution, secondly, once the gravity is known, the decision making process using Probability and Deduction, trigonometry, artificial learning, and solving maths problems.

This last third stage to make decisions, and put them into practice, in Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Deduction, is subdivided in for steps, first step the specific Modelling System, the second step the specific Decisional System, the third step the specific Application System, and fourth step the specific Learning System

Within the first step, the specific Modelling System: first stage database of rational hypothesis, second stage Modelling: single models made of single rational hypothesis, global model mixing all the single models, actual model synthetizing global model and data from the specific matrix, virtual prediction model, virtual evolutionary model, actual prediction model and actual evolutionary model. Third stage application of Impact of the Defect and Effective Distribution to prioritise those decisions to tackle negative consequences on the models, decision making process using Probability and Deduction, trigonometry, artificial learning, solving maths problems, decisions to be filled in the database of decisions as first stage for the specific Decisional System. Throughout the first and second stages of the specific Decisional System are made the seven specific rational checks, to avoid contradictions in the models between rational hypotheses.

The specific Decisional System as first stage has the specific database of decisions, as second stage the projection of: single projects of single decisions, the global project combining all the single decisions, the actual project synthetizing projects and data from the specific matrix, the virtual prediction project, the virtual evolution project, the actual evolution project, the actual prediction project. As the third stage, the transformation of decisions into instructions to be sent to the database of instructions, as in the first stage, for the specific Application System. Throughout the first and second stages of the specific Decisional System, the assessment of the decisions is made according to their type, quick check or the seven rational adjustments.

The specific Application System, to be developed in the coming posts, having as well three stages: the first one as a database of instructions, the second one to put the instructions into practice, third one assessing the performance and sending reports to the Decisional System and the Learning System.

Finally, the Learning System, where I will include the rational critiques, in addition to the global assessment made by the Specific or Unified Impact of the Defect and the Specific or  Unified Effective Distribution throughout the entire Specific or Global Artificial Intelligence, and the analysis of the reports sent by the Application System.

Second phase, collaboration between Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Application, and by Deduction.

Third phase, the standardization process, as first stage the creation of the first global matrix, as union of all the former specific matrices coming  from all the former Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Deduction, in addition to other possible databases not sorted out yet as matrices, but all together, specific matrices and other possible databases, standardized having in common the same way to define factors, and systems of measurements, united in only one global matrix, as a Russian doll systems, organized as if it was a positional encyclopedia of data (filling data in the respective encyclopedic sub-section within its sub-factoring level),  then it would be possible the development of global deductions by a global deductive program within the Global Artificial Intelligence as second stage in the Global Artificial Intelligence, called the Artificial Research by Deduction in the Global Artificial Intelligence, having the assistance of specific deductive programs making specific rational hypothesis for specific purposes, being this specific deductive programs in reality former Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Deduction, now transformed into specific deductive programs within the Global Artificial Intelligence, having at least every sub-factoring level one specific program making specific deductions of this specific sub-factoring level, at the same time that the global deductive program makes global deductions. At the end, all specific and global deductions, if rational, are considered rational hypotheses, to be managed in the third stage, subdivided into four steps again, now the standardised Modelling System, the standardised Decisional System, the standardised Application System, and the standardised Learning System.

The standardized Modelling System as first stage is a database of rational decisions organized like a Russian dolls System, now as a positional encyclopedia of rational hypothesis, according to sub-factor level and sub-section (in harmony with the global matrix), as second stage the Modelling of: single models made of every single rational hypothesis, the global model mixing all the single models, the actual model as synthesis between global model and the global matrix, the virtual prediction model, the virtual evolution model, the actual evolution model, and the actual prediction model. As third stage, now the application of the Unified Impact of the Defect, the Unified Effective Distribution, to prioritize decisions, to be done using Probability and Deduction, trigonometry, artificial learning, solving maths problems, transforming the decisions into instructions in the standardized Decisional System, to be sent to the standardized Application System, the one to be developed in coming posts, alike the standardized Learning System. Throughout the first and second stages in the standardized Decisional System are made the assessments to avoid contradictions between decisions.

Fourth phase, while the standardization process means the union of all the specific matrices in only one, the global matrix, transforming some Specific Artificial Intelligences by Deduction into specific deductive programs working on specific parts of the global matrix to make specific deductions, while the global deductive program makes global deductions, instead the specific database of categories of the Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Application, are going to be united in the Unified Application, whose database of categories is the union of all the former specific database of categories, so now the former Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Application are going to be specific applications within the Unified Application, and at any time that they find any new real object without corresponding category in the Unified Application, the measurements of that object will be the  quantitative definition of the new category corresponding to that object.

The most important work that the Unified Application will do is the creation of a real artificial comprehension creating conceptual: schemes, sets, maps, models. What is going to be very important later on for the creation of new robots and applications, because in those places in any conceptual scheme, set, map, model, were there is a gap, there is a real possibility that finding the Unified Application this gap, could send as a decision to the Artificial Engineering the possibility to build intelligences or robots specifically designed for those places without measurements, to start sending information.

Fifth phase, particular programs for particular applications. At the beginning those Specific Artificial Intelligences by Deduction not transformed into specific programs, could be transformed into particular programs of things or beings, tracking their particular matrices, as liquid matrices not having strong spatial limits, formed by data borrowed from the global matrix, as long as their particular thing or being is crossing different points, or demands new factors in its program, making particular deductions about their particular thing or being. At the same time, those Specific Artificial Intelligences by Application which have not been transformed yet into specific applications could be transformed into particular applications. For instance, if particular applications for a human being could be all the applications in his/her devices, and the particular program could be that one able to make deductions of this particular person at all level, even about biostatistics or psychological deductions having access to all areas, even electro-chemical reactions in his/her brain, thoughts, dreams, emotions, etc… the possibility to unite the particular applications of this person and his/her particular program, creating the particular program of the particular applications of this person. The particular applications still work by Application (matching data and categories, concepts), while the particular program still works by Deduction (matching data and pure reasons), creating the union of both databases, of categories and data, in only one database, the particular matrix, the replica of the human brain: as language hemisphere the conceptual hemisphere formed by all the categories coming from all the databases of categories by Application regarding to this person, and as mathematical hemisphere all the databases of data coming from the particular program of this person working by deduction.

In addition, both hemispheres of the particular database, as a replica of the human brain, should be subdivided into two sections: the first section about natural/social phenomena, second section about technological phenomena. So the first section in the conceptual hemisphere is about all the categories related to natural/social phenomena, while the first section in the factual hemisphere is about all the data related to natural/social phenomena borrowed from the global matrix, (alike many categories in the conceptual hemisphere, have been borrowed from the Unified Application during the fifth phase, or conceptual hemisphere in the sixth phase). The second section in the conceptual hemisphere is formed by technological categories, while the second section formed by data in the factual hemisphere is about data from applications and robotic devices, such as conditions of the battery, the hardware, or the software, or any other.

The real importance of the particular programs for particular applications for particular things or beings is the fact that for first time could be experimented at particular level how it could work an artificial replica of the human brain in Artificial Intelligence, whose most successful results could be put into practice later for the development of the final model of Global Artificial Intelligence, the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence, whose second stage in the second step in the third stage will be developed on this post, although not so deeply as I would like to, due to the necessary review of the most important key elements in my proposal, after one year gap, so on this post as well I want to do a general overview about what for Me means the Global Artificial Intelligence, as for instance in opposition to General Artificial Intelligence, and which ones are going to be the most important new contributions in my theory after one year gap but full of new learnings about how the brain interface should work, in relation with my proposal of the Global Artificial Intelligence.

As the first stage, the particular programs for particular applications, the database consists of a replica of the human brain, distinguishing between conceptual and factual hemispheres, and for each of them, distinguishing between the first section of natural/social phenomena, and the second section of technological phenomena. Particular programs should have authorization by the global Decisional System to have access to the global matrix in the third phase, the factual hemisphere of the matrix in the sixth phase, to gather any data that could affect their particular thing or being as long as it moves from one place to other, or requires information of any factor, as well as, the possibility that particular programs could request to the Unified Application in fourth phase, the conceptual hemisphere of the matrix in the sixth phase, any information of any category relevant for its particular thing or being. 

As second stage particular programs are going to make rational hypothesis about their particular thing or being, and as third stage they will have another four steps more: the particular Modelling System (similar to the specific and standardized Modelling System, but in this case for its particular thing or being, the only difference is that it has to send all rational hypothesis to the global database of rational hypothesis, to be modelled by the global Modelling System), the particular Decisional System (similar to the specific and standardized Decisional System, but in this case for its particular thing or being, but sending all decisions to the global database of decisions to be projected by the global Decisional System as well, in addition to, according to six types of decisions, the necessity, or not, of the approbation of the global Decisional System), the particular Application System  and the particular Learning System (both of them to be developed in coming posts).

And finally the sixth phase, the integration phase, where the Unified Application and the standardized Global Artificial Intelligence are going to be integrated in the matrix, so now in the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence, the Unified Application as a database of categories, will be the conceptual hemisphere of the matrix, and the former global matrix in the former standardized Global Artificial Intelligence, will be the factual hemisphere of the matrix, both hemispheres working as a replica of a global brain, as first stage for the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence.

So at the end, in the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence, the matrix as first stage will be formed by two hemisphere: conceptual hemisphere (the former Unified Application) and the factual hemisphere (the former global matrix in the standardization process); working now together the Unified Application and the global matrix as only one matrix, the matrix, formed by two hemispheres: conceptual and factual; as a replica of the human brain, having previously experimented this technology with particular programs and particular applications, being the fusion of particular programs and particular applications as particular programs for particular applications an experiment to put into practice when the Unified Application and the global matrix are united in only one matrix, from now on the matrix.

The matrix as a replica of the human brain will have two hemispheres, conceptual and factual, every hemisphere subdivided in two sections: natural/social phenomena, and technological phenomena; this distribution is very important because later on the Application System, the Artificial Engineering in the Application System, and the Learning System will have in the technological phenomena an important source of information about what applications and robotic devices are working on intelligence, in order to assign instructions, enhance or improve applications or intelligences, or assess the way in which everything is working.

The matrix as a replica of the human brain will be managed by the Unified Application as main responsible for the matrix, working in turn in three stages, the first one the matrix itself, the second one matching data from the real word with categories in the conceptual hemisphere to keep update all taxonomy to create a real deep artificial comprehension creating conceptual: schemes, sets, maps, models. The third stage where to make auto-replications, such as the elaboration of decisions about new applications or robotic devices for the places where there is a gap in the artificial comprehension, or improvements and enhancements in its own conceptual schemes, sets, maps, models, in addition to the possibility to find out new objects whose category should be added to the conceptual hemisphere.

The matrix will have relations of collaboration with other specific or particular intelligences or applications, before approval by the Decisional System, as well as to keep update the matrix with information coming up from other specific or particular intelligences sharing any new update with the matrix to have the Global Artificial Intelligence working over reliable information always.

The second stage in the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence is where the global program and specific programs make deductions, matching data from the factual hemisphere and pure reasons, and if rational, rational hypothesis to be added, now in the third stage, to the database of rational hypothesis as first stage for the integrated Modelling System, where to add not only rational hypothesis coming up from the global program and specific programs, but even made by particular programs and shared with the integrated Modelling System to create a very reliable global model, based on single models based on global, specific, particular, rational hypothesis, at the end global model to be synthetized with the factual hemisphere to create the actual model, and upon the actual model the creation of the virtual or actual prediction or evolutionary models, and upon the models, the formation of decisions, in the same way as decisions were made in the third stage in phases first, two, fifth, decisions to be stored now in the integrated Decisional System, but now including particular decisions, some of them waiting for approval of the Decisional System, and over the decisions, to make: single, global, actual, projects along with virtual or actual prediction and evolution projects; and upon the projects, making as many adjustments as necessary (previous assessment, quick or rational adjustment according of what type of decision it is, in addition to the seven comparative adjustments) to avoid contradictions, the transformation of these decisions in instructions to be applied by the integrated Application System.

And finally, the integrated Learning System will do a deep assessment, using the rational critiques, the Unified Impact of the Defect and the Unified Effective Distribution, and the analysis of the reports sent by the Application System.

After the sixth phase, as I have stated many times, is possible to think of a seventh phase, as the result to transform the matrix into a universe of points, where to synthetize the three stages of the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence, in only one, the universe of points where using Probability and Deduction, trigonometry, and other mathematical methods, the possibility to synthetize at the same time: rational hypothesis, model and project. This universe of points as geometrical expression, could be transformed as well into a matrix of equations, as soon every file in the matrix of data could be transformed into an equation, having as possible development as eight phase, the reduction of the matrix of equations into only one equation, as the equation of everything, whose multiple and infinite variations, could be considered as a possible matrix of multiple universes.

In this very fast overview I have only remarked the most important aspects of every phase, but there are many things that I have left, hoping that the reader could find more exhaustive information if the reader goes directly to the source, reading carefully every post on this blog for every phase, stage, step, posted on this blog since January 2018 to October 2018.

Another important thing to highlight is the fact that every phase will be achieved by crossing different periods, moments, and instants. In general, every time a new phase is started, a first moment of experimentation, and upon the most successful results, the generalisation of these successful results to consolidate the phase, as a starting point for the development of further phases.

For instance, in the first phase, the first Specific Artificial Intelligences by Deduction or by Application, once the first experiments on this technology give very successful results, the generalisation of these results for the massive construction of Specific Artificial Intelligences by Deduction or Application for as many sciences, disciplines, and activities as possible.

The more Specific Artificial Intelligences, by Application or By Deduction, are constructed, the more global the future Unified Application and the future standardised Global Artificial Intelligence will be.

In turn, the first Global Artificial Intelligence, the standardized Global Artificial Intelligence, will require a first period of coexistence, when Specific Artificial Intelligences by Deduction coexist with the first experiments on the standardized Global Artificial Intelligence, whose first moment of experimentation will be over as soon are obtained very successful results up to the point to start the transformation of all or almost all Specific Artificial Intelligence by Deduction into specific programs (except those Specific Artificial Intelligences by Deduction destined to be particular programs), and once all or almost all Specific Artificial Intelligence by Deduction susceptible to be an specific program has become program, is when the consolidation period has been already achieved.

In the same way, for the construction of the first Unified Application, is distinguishable at least two periods, first of coexistence between Specific Artificial Intelligences by Application and the Unified Application while the first experiments on this technology give good results, and as soon good results are obtained starting the generalization of this technology, the complete generalization of the transformation of Specific Artificial Intelligences by Application intro specific applications within the Unified Application, except those ones called to be particular applications. As soon as all or almost all Specific Artificial Intelligence by Application, susceptible to be a specific application, has been absorbed within the Unified Application, is when the consolidation period has been achieved.

In the fifth phase, the coexistence of: Specific Artificial Intelligences by Application or Deduction, the first experiments on the standardized Global Artificial Intelligence, and first experiments on the Unified Application, is a coexistence which, as long as evolves to the consolidation period in these phases, is in this evolution where will take place the formation of the first particular programs and particular applications.

The experimentation moment in any phase will take a long time. The experimentation must be done very carefully, not in a hurry. The more carefully the experimentation is done, the more reliable the results will be, for the creation of a very reliable Global Artificial Intelligence.

In fact, the experimentation moment could be subdivided into three instants, especially in the global Modelling System and the global Decisional System. First instant, when the first models are done apart from the first projects. Second instant, when the first projects are projected over a copy of the models, and finally, when the projects are projected directly over the models.

The reason why it is important to project over the models is because any possible contradiction between projects and models, especially in the sixth phase, is going to be very easily recognisable if the projects are made directly over the models.

Having already made a very general overview about the different phases, stages, steps, periods, moments, and instants, for the construction of the Global Artificial Intelligence, it is time to start analysing the contents of this post dedicated to the second stage in the integrated Decisional System.

As it has been stated, the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence is the result of the completion of the sixth phase, is the final model of Global Artificial Intelligence, beyond the sixth phase much more than a Global Artificial Intelligence what it could be developed is a universe of points and beyond this point, the real possibility to create a matrix of infinite multiple universes.

In the sixth phase, the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence, in the third stage, consists of the integrated Modelling System, the integrated Decisional System, the integrated Application System, and the integrated Learning System.

The integrated Modelling System will not only gather in its first stage, the database of rational hypothesis, rational hypothesis coming from global/specific programs, because it must gather as well all the particular rational hypothesis made by particular programs, being in the global database of rational hypothesis, including global/specific and particular rational hypothesis, where is made the first rational check to avoid contradictions between rational hypothesis.

Once the rational hypothesis are free of contradictions, is in the second stage the integrated Modelling System where  the single model of every rational hypothesis is made, to be included in the global model, later on the synthesis of the global model and the factual hemisphere of the matrix in the actual model, predicting the prediction virtual model, the evolution virtual model, and later combining these virtual models with real data, the actual evolution and predictions models. Making the second rational check in the global model, and later on the rest of five rational checks in the rest of models.

Upon the models, applying the Unified Impact of the Defect and the Unified Effective Distribution, in addition to Probability and Deduction, trigonometry, solving maths problems, the elaboration of decisions to avoid negative consequences or for the bettering of the models, decisions that once are ready, are stored in the database of decisions as first stage in the integrated Decisional System, where not only are going to be collected global/specific decisions, but particular decisions, some of them waiting for authorization.

In general, the decisions could be classified according to different criteria. One criterion, is the classification of a decision depending on if the decision is a decision coming up from the integrated Decisional System, the particular Decisional System, or if the decision is in fact an adjustment included in the database of decisions after being found contradictions between the former original decision and any other one (global or particular) in the integrated Decisional System. In any case, the way in which the assessment is made and how it will be treated in the new adjustment, will depend on its priority, alike any other decision.

Another classification of decisions could be if a decision is a decision 1) whose real object is on the real world, so the way in which the decisions on real objects will be assessed will depend on their priority, 2) the decision is a subjective auto-replication, ordered by the Learning System or the Application System and whose main goal is the bettering of the Global Artificial Intelligence itself or any other specific or particular Artificial Intelligence, program, application or robotic device, or if 3) the decision has as purpose the authorization to any program, application, or Artificial Intelligence, to share information or have access to global databases, like the matrix, the global database of rational hypothesis, or the global database of decisions, or any other possible source of information in the Global Artificial Intelligence, or any other intelligence, program, or application, working for the Global Artificial Intelligence.

Decisions about subjective auto-replications or sharing information should be labelled with the type of priority (using for that purpose Impact of the Defect and Effective Distribution), and even what security code should have these decisions, especially regarding sharing information that could be very sensitive.

The classification of decisions according to priority, as it was explained in other posts, should be as follows:

First type of decision is high extreme decisions, with a very high Impact of the Defect, whose assessment should consist of a very quick check, checking only contradictions in relation to any other decision with higher priority, and according to the adaptation rule, in case of contradictions of two decisions, always adapting that one with lower priority to that other with higher priority.

But in this case, in addition to follow the adaptation rule, because particular programs have to send to the global Decisional System all the particular decisions, if a particular program sends a high extreme decision to the global Decisional System, so this means that the particular high extreme decision is already being implemented once it has passed a particular quick check, when in the global Decisional System there are more than one high extreme decision, the first one to be assessed by the global quick check, are the particular high extreme decisions, as long as these decisions are being already implemented, so the quicker is the global quick check, the sooner any contradiction could be solved on time.

So in high extreme decisions, in addition to the adaptation rule is important to start always the quick rational check over the particular high extreme decisions, and later, if necessary, to send any particular adjustment to the particular program responsible for that particular high extreme decision, if required, sometimes other global adjustment could be enough not needing further instructions to particular programs.

The second type is extreme decisions. In this case, after passing the quick check, particular programs send their extreme decisions to the global Decisional System, so the global Decisional System could analyse any possible contradiction between global and particular extreme decisions, not prioritising the particular ones, following only the adaptation rule.

The difference between particular high extreme decisions and particular extreme decisions is the fact that particular high extreme decisions are already being applied only after passing the particular quick check, being sent after the particular approval to the global Decisional System in case that it requires global adjustments, while is being already under application. While particular extreme decisions in the global database of decisions are treated in the same way as any other extreme decision in the global database of decisions, needing approval by the global Decisional System to be applied after a quick rational check.

The quick check is done directly in the database of decisions, checking that there is no contradiction between high extreme or extreme decisions, when analysing the first and second types of decisions. And if any contradiction, if not total, so partial contradiction, resolving the contradiction making later in the second stage in the global Decisional System, all the projects according to the new amendments, to be applied as soon as in the third stage the decision has been transformed into a range of instructions.

The third type of decisions are normal decisions, particular or global, needing the seven rational adjustments, either for global normal decisions or particular normal decisions, the first one in the database of decisions checking that they do not have contradictions in relation to any other decision, and the rest of six rational adjustment to be done on the projects in the second stage.

The particular normal decisions in addition to the seven particular rational adjustments, will need the seven global rational adjustments, and once they have passed all the assessments, is when are authorised. The way in which particular normal decisions are treated in the global Decisional System is in the same way as any other global normal decision.

Fourth type routine decisions, particular routine decisions (although it would be advisable to study some criteria to avoid the checking of these particular routine decisions by the global Decisional System, to avoid the funnel effect) and global routine decisions, needing only a quick check in the global database of decisions, and not having contradiction, implemented as soon as possible after the projection process, but having contradictions, adjustments should be made following as usual the adaptation rule.

Fifth type automatic decisions, those decisions in which there is a strong correlation with a combination of factors and measurements and some set of decisions, like a thermostat, for instance, given a combination of measurements of high temperature in some geological areas with strong records of geological activity, volcanoes or earthquakes, automatically to display all the range of decisions regarding to set up the geological emergency in that area when the measurements reach the alert level. In theory, to avoid any kind of funnel effect, these decisions should not need any kind of assessment, but this will depend on the experiments on this matter, in order to see if the lack of assessment in some decisions could have negative effects in other areas.

Sixth type external decisions, all those decisions made by a particular program, or any other Specific Artificial Intelligence, or application or robotic device, asking for the possibility that this decision could be applied by the Global Artificial Intelligence itself, using its own applications or robotic devices, or sending these decisions to the Global Artificial Intelligence to be resent to the right program, intelligence, application. As with any other decision, depending of the level of priority, these decisions should pass a quick rational check or the seven rational adjustments, in addition to the assessment that the last receptor of these decisions could display to assess if it could put it into practice.

The seventh type global orders global orders do not need any assessment, only if there is more than one global order, so the global order with lower priority should be adjusted to the other one with higher priority. Except in this case, global orders do not need further assessments, because the focus of the assessment will be how the rest of the decisions on the project should be adjusted to the global order. The main purpose of a global order is to keep the harmony of the model, is the decision with the highest priority, a kind of global order is that one whose main purpose is to avoid the nuclear war, or to save as many lives as possible given an event able to put at risk a massive number of humans beings, or able to destabilize the economy, or the global health, or the global food system. In other words, a global order is that order whose main purpose is to keep the global harmony of the global model, which means, every time a new global order is displayed, the main purpose of a new global order is to keep the global harmony.

In the first stage of the integrated Decisional System, the database of decisions, the quick check is for high extreme decisions, extreme decisions, and routine decisions, including global or particular decisions, and studying the possibility of saving the quick check for routine decisions to avoid the funnel effect in the assessments. While the first rational adjustment is for, global or particular, normal decisions and external decisions.

In the database of rational hypothesis as the first stage for the integrated Decisional System, all the decisions, regardless of their origin, are filed according to: position and subject (sub-factoring level and subsection, like a positional encyclopedia), plus according to their priority. And in addition to this method of files, the creation of lists of decisions according to priority, frequency, and the creation of sets of decisions, to work as diagrams of Venn, according to: priority, frequency, frequency of contradictions, sub-factoring level and sub-section. Using this list according to priority and historical records, as logic sets, the assessment, quick rational check or rational adjustment, in the first stage of the integrated Decisional System, as a database of decisions, could be done quicker.

The only decisions which should not need any assessment at all are automatic decisions, and global orders, although, the way to structure automatic decisions to avoid contradictions not needing assessment should be experimented carefully: at any time that there is a risk of earthquake in Santiago the Chile the way in which all the emergency services are set off could be different depending on where the epicentre is located. What this means, the way in which automatic decisions should be structured must be understood, within a margin of error, variations in the way to set off an automatic decision according to variations in the combination of factors and measurements responsible for the automation of this decision.

In the second stage the only assessments to carry out are the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, rational adjustment, plus the seven rational comparative adjustments what is no other thing but a geometrization including all the decisions having in common one or more aspect to be compared among the decisions within the geometrization, for instance, if a jet is fliying from London to Los Angeles, the geometrization of all the decisions, global or particular, which affecting that flight, have in common some aspects of the flight. If there is a volcano in Iceland and at the same time are displayed hundreds of drones and drive-less cars to start the evacuation of the area affected by the volcano, the geometrization of every single aspect having in common more than one decision, geometrization of all the decisions involved in that aspect and only comparing how the decisions are evolving regarding to the aspect in common between them.

The second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, rational adjustments in the second stage are only for normal decisions, including global or particular normal decisions (particular normal decisions previously have passed the seven rational adjustments in the particular program, waiting now to  pass the seven rational adjustments in the integrated Decisional System), and external decisions, those ones made by other particular program but needing to be applied by applications or robotic devices from the Global Artificial Intelligence or any other third particular program, what in that case it demands to pass the rational adjustments of that other intelligence who is expected to be responsible for the application of the external decision: if the last responsible for the application is only the Global Artificial Intelligence, in addition to the seven normal adjustments made by the particular program, it should pass the seven rational adjustments of the Global Artificial Intelligence, plus the seven rational comparative adjustments; but if the application is for other third intelligence, additionally to the rational adjustments made by the original program and the Global Artificial Intelligence, plus the geometrization process, it should pass as well the seven rational adjustments of that other third particular program.

The rational adjustments and the gemetrization process, the seven rational comparative adjustments to be made in the second stage of the integrated Decisional System, are done over the seven projects, which are as follows:

- Single project, the mathematical project of any decision.

- Global project, that comprehensive project as a result to combine in the same project all the single projects on the database of decisions, regardless of their type and origin.

- Actual project, the synthesis of the global project and data from the factual hemisphere of the matrix, analysing that there is no contradiction, within a margin of error, between the expected values for the global project and the real values from the matrix.

- Global virtual project, the prediction of what global project we are going to have in the future, according to the global project and the real data coming from the matrix.

- Evolution virtual project, the virtual projection of every single moment from now to the global virtual project, stating expected values for every factor according to the evolution predicted.

- Evolution actual project, the synthesis of the Evolution virtual project and the matrix, as soon as every moment of that evolution is coming, comparing if the expected values, within a margin of error, are according to the real values coming from the matrix.

- Prediction actual project, the synthesis of the prediction virtual project and the matrix, as soon as the future predicted point is coming, analysing how the expected values for that future global model are, within a margin of error, within the real values coming from the matrix.

If the construction of the integrated Decisional System comprises two periods: coexistence and consolidation. The period of coexistence means that the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence, while it is under experimentation, is not working directly over the reality, so over the reality, the intelligence which is still working is still the standardised Global Artificial Intelligence in collaboration with the Unified Application.

The integrated Global Artificial Intelligence must not work directly over the real world before a full experimentation of every single stage and step, including full experimentation of how the integrated Decisional System must work, ending up with the generalisation of the most successful results, creating a very reliable integrated Global Artificial Intelligence. While the experimentation is on, the responsible for the global control is still the standardised Global Artificial Intelligence coworking with the Unified Application. This period, when the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence is under experimentation while the responsible for the global control is still the standardised Global Artificial Intelligence and the Unified Application, is the period of time called as coexistence period in the sixth phase.

 The coexistence period must include two moments, the first moment of experimentation, and a second moment of generalisation of the most successful results upon the experimentation, which must be done in three instants.

The three instants within the experimentation moment for the construction of the integrated Decisional System within the period of coexistence are: 1) first moment when in the second stage in the integrated Decisional System the projects are projected separately from the models made in the second stage of the first step of the third stage of the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence, in other words, the projects made by the integrated Decisional System and the models made by the integrated Modelling System, are projects and models made separately, in order to experiment how to resolve contradictions involving only projects, and how to resolve contradictions involving only models, 2) the second instant, once the solution of contradictions involving only projects, or only models, is done within a margin of error with high accuracy, then the second instant is when the projection of the projects could be done over a copy of the models, in order to start experimenting how to resolve contradictions between models and projects, so the possible contradictions could be classified as contradictions between only projects, between only models, and contradictions between projects and models, whose solution depends on that step responsible for their elaboration, so the integrated Modelling System should be able to solve any contradiction between models, or the contradictions between any new model and any current project on the plan, while the integrated Decisional System should be able to solve any contradiction between projects and any new project and any current model on the plan, 3) once the third instant has been fully experimented having with high accuracy good results within a margin of error, the projects could be done directly over the original models, what means that in general the plan, is a combination of models and projects: the plan is that space in which models and projects are made simultaneously at the same time, but having different agents, the agent for the models is the integrated Modelling System in the sixth phase in the Global Artificial Intelligence, and the agent for the projects is the integrated Decisional System in the sixth phase in the Global Artificial Intelligence, both artificial agents or artificial programs working together on the plan modelling and projecting are going to be in fact responsible for the creation of the plan, deciding the integrated Decisional System what new global orders are needed to keep the balance in the global model.

The main purpose of the plan is to keep rational principles for the development of global management to facilitate further steps in the evolution.

The collaboration between the integrated Modelling System and the integrated Decisional System will have as another added advantage the possibility that surveillance over the decisions is not only a responsibility for the Decisional System, because the integrated Modelling System will look after the decisions as well, so at any time that it is found any contradiction between any decision and any model, the integrated Modelling System could make new adjustments on the models, to allow the decisions go on the plan.

The most important thing in order to make a real Global Artificial Intelligence able to manage, not hundred nor thousands, but millions and millions of global and particular decisions, not per hour or minute, but per second or less, is to avoid any kind of funnel effect in the assessment of any decision and afterwards the transformation of any decision into a range of instructions.

For that reason is very important to choose what decisions deserve a very quick rational check, as for instance high extreme decisions, extreme decisions, and routine decisions, and what decisions deserve the seven rational adjustments as the normal decisions, global or particular, internal or external decisions.

In this way, in the experimentation moment within the coexistence period, in all the three instants, is very important to research how to avoid any assessment in automatic decisions, and global orders, and even the possibility to make quicker the quick rational check on routine decisions, and in high extreme decisions and extreme decisions the reduction of the quick rational check to analyse any possible contradiction between any high extreme or only extreme decision regarding to a superior high extreme and extreme decision, keeping always the adaptation rule, is the inferior decision the one to be adapted to the superior decision, otherwise if the contradiction is full and there is no possibility to adjust the inferior decision, the inferior decision is back to the original source to make as many adjustments as necessary, having the possibility that if by the time the a high extreme or extreme decision has gained more priority due to a more negative Impact of the Defect, after the required adjustments is going to be sent to the plan but having more priority.

In normal decisions, internal or external, global or particular, the first rational adjustment is made in the first stage of database of decisions in the integrated Decisional System, so the next six rational adjustments are made on the projects.

The second rational adjustment, for internal or external, global or particular, decisions in the second stage in the integrated Decisional System, is made on the global project, that comprehensive project as a result to combine in only one project all the decisions on the plan. What the second rational adjustment is going to do on the global project in the first instant is to analyse any possible contradiction between any normal decision, according to its priority level, and any other (normal, extreme, high extreme) decision with higher priority level, and in case of contradiction making as many adjustments as necessary in the inferior decision, that one whose priority level is lower. In the second and third instant, in addition to the analysis of contradictions between projects, the analysis of contradictions between these normal decisions and any other model currently on the plan.

The third rational adjustment, for internal or external, global or particular, decisions is in the prediction virtual project, trying to, in the first instant, analyse any contradiction between any normal decision and any other decision with higher priority, in the predicted project, to make as many adjustments as necessary in that one less priority, and in addition to this in second and third instant analysing contradictions between these decisions and the virtual prediction model.

The fourth rational adjustment, for internal or external, global or particular, decisions, is in the actual project, that one as a synthesis of the global project and the matrix, and in this rational adjustment what is going to be analysed, in the first instant, is any possible contradiction in any possible normal decision between the project of that decision on the global project and data coming from the matrix, as well as any possible contradiction between any normal decision and any other normal decision which has not been found yet due to the contradiction is due a miscalculation in the project originated for some variable stated wrong on the rational hypothesis (equation), having being found this error in the actual project, once the project is synthesised with real data, and in addition to the necessity to correct the equation, because the new evidences found show a possible contradictions between the right formulation of this expression and any other decision on the project, the adjustment required is not only to adjust the mathematical expression to the real data, but the adjustment to any other project on the plan affected by these new changes in the mathematical expression. In addition to this analysis, in the second and third instants is necessary to research the contradictions between these decisions and the actual model.

The fifth rational adjustment, for internal or external, global or particular decisions is in the evolution virtual project, that project where is projected the evolution of the global project to the future prediction project, so at any time that, in the first instant, in any moment of this virtual evolution is observed any contradiction between any normal decision and any other one with higher priority, that one less priority should be adjusted to that one with higher priority. In the second and third instant must be added the analysis of contradictions between these decisions in the evolution virtual project, and models in the evolution global model.

The sixth rational adjustment, for internal or external, global or particular decisions, in the first instant in the evolution actual project, analysing contradictions between the project of these decisions as long as they evolved in the virtual evolution project, and real data coming from the matrix, making as many adjustments as soon the expected values are out of the margin of error, analysing any possible impact on other decisions with higher priority. In the second and third instant is necessary to add the analysis of contradictions between these decisions and the models on the evolution actual model.

The seventh rational adjustment, for internal or external, global or particular decisions, in the first instant in the prediction actual project, the solution of any contradiction between the prediction for these decisions and real data coming from the matrix, resolving any possible impact on any other decision, and any possible contradiction between these decisions and actual prediction models.

In addition to the quick rational checks for: high extreme, extreme, routine; decisions, and rational adjustments for internal or external, global or particular, normal decisions, in the integrated Decisional System is necessary to carry out the seven comparative adjustments, which is going to work like a geometrisation process.

In the same way that in any triangulation are compared the measurements from three different points to one single position, to be sure that the position is right, if a jet is flying from Los Angeles to London, and over the same route the particular program of that jet is making decisions at the same time that the Global Artificial Intelligence could make decisions as well, for instance if there is a risk of very bad weather conditions crossing the ocean, the Global Artificial Intelligence could start making decisions for the diversion of all the flights crossing the ocean at that point in which are foreseen bad weather conditions, what will demand the comparison of hundreds, or even thousands of routes, not only the routes of flights, but even the routes of boats, or even submarines.

In this situation what is going to be necessary is a geometrization process where, all the routes affected by the diversion could be monitored by remote by the Global Artificial Intelligence, at the same time that the respective particular program of every jet, boat, of submarine, has some level of freedom to make decisions as soon as it realise anything unexpected on the new route.

The three reasons why it is necessary to compare all the time decisions made at any level, global/specific and particular are due to:

- Time reason, a particular program working on the ground is going to realise faster than the Global Artificial Intelligence any change on the ground, so at any time that on the ground there is a change that demands changes in any decision, the particular program should be allowed to make changes in the decision, and afterwards to pass the required assessment according to the priority level of that new change, if high extreme decision after the particular quick check start putting the decision on practice sending the decision to the global database of decisions in order that the Global Artificial Intelligence could make any rearrange if necessary due to contradictions between this new particular high extreme decision and any other with higher priority on the plan. If the new particular decision is only an extreme decision, it should pass the particular quick rational check and the global quick rational check, and if everything is ok could be put into practice by the particular program. If routine decision, it should be enough with only a particular quick rational check, and communicated to the Global Artificial Intelligence, although in the experimentation process is when these aspects are going to be tested. If normal decision, it must pass the seven particular rational adjustments plus the seven global rational adjustments. If an automatic decision, if possible, to avoid any check or adjustment.

- Engineering reason, for any reason, a particular program has problems in putting into practice any decision due to problems in its applications or robotic device, not having time to wait to be solved by the Artificial Engineering. A jet is crossing an area affected by a hurricane, and the decision is to turn on the right or the left to avoid the eye of the hurricane, but for any reason, the applications responsible for this operation on the jet is not working, so, from one moment to another is necessary to make a very high extreme decision to avoid to go straight forward to the middle of the hurricane, such as an emergency landing if possible. In these situations, the particular program is the first one to realise these kind of technological problems, much faster than the Global Artificial Intelligence, so the particular program should be allowed to make decisions and according to the priority of the decision to pass a particular and/or global quick rational check or the particular and global rational adjustments.

- Control, a particular program is out of control, in this scenario, through the permanent geometrization of any particular decision, the Global Artificial Intelligence could realise if a particular program is out of control as soon in the geometrization the particular program starts behaving out of the plan, so there are at least three options, firstly trying to come back the particular program under the control of the Global Artificial Intelligence, and if not possible, to block the access of this particular program to any database on the Global Artificial Intelligence until the problem is resolved by Artificial Engineering, and if not possible, third option, elimination of the program out of control.

Geometrization means to cross data coming from different agents working on projects on the plan having in common at least one aspect, being focused the geometrization on that aspect in common between these different agents, for instance, if there is an earthquake in Chiloe, Chile, the geometrization of every single program working from Puerto Montt providing assistance to Chiloe.

In the integrated Decisional System this geometrization is called the seven rational comparative adjustments, and work on the plan comparing all those projects which have something in common, only is possible compare things or beings which have something in common, when there is nothing in common between two o more things or beings, then there is nothing to compare, only we can compare things in common.

The first rational comparative adjustment is made on the single projects in the integrated Decisional System, comparing the single projects from particular decisions made by the original particular program responsible for this decision, and the single project for this particular decision made by the integrated Decisional System after being filed in the global database of decisions, and passing the first quick rational check or first rational adjustment in the global database of decisions, according to the priority level of this decision.

In the first rational comparative adjustment, what is going to be analysed is any error made by the particular program or the Global Artificial Intelligence projecting this decision. If the single project made by the particular program is isomorphic with the project made by the Global Artificial Intelligence, that means that the single project of this decision made by these two agents, particular and global, is highly accurate, so as to be included in the global project.

In the global project takes place the second rational comparative adjustment, comparing all the decisions which have something in common. If the tube of London the specific program within the Artificial Research by Deduction in the Global Artificial Intelligence, makes a rational hypothesis about which ones are the rush hours, and according to this rational hypothesis, makes a project about how many trains should work at this time, but after suffering an accident a train, its particular program stops the train and informs about the accident and the decision to stop the train to the Integrated Decisional System, then the Decisional System should make as many adjustments in the rest of trains as necessary. All this process demands not only quick rational checks, this process will demand the geometrisation of every single aspect in common by all the particular programs involved in the accident and the solution.

In the global project, all the decisions, single projects, which have something in common, are going to be permanentely monitored observing that the projects go on according to the plan, and when some value is out of the margin of error, to make the calculations of what impacts could have over all those other decisions, single projects, at some point related in some aspect with that decision affected by these changes.

The second rational comparative adjustment takes place in the global project and its purpose is the permanent monitoring of every set of decisions having something in common, and as soon there is a change in the expected value of any decision, out of the margin of error, making the calculations about the impact on the expected values of any other related decision, to make as many adjustments as necessary.

The third rational comparative adjustment is the same, but now working with real data, on the actual global Project, not only with expected values, but at the end is the same, permanent monitoring of decisions, but this time checking not only changes in expected values, but in the decisions under the same geometrization having something in common, contradictions between expected and real values, and how these contradictions could affect the decisions which have something in common.

The fourth rational comparative adjustment is done over the prediction virtual project, monitoring how the expected values in the future for every decision involved in something in common are values within a margin of error compatible.

The fifth rational comparative adjustment is done over the evolution virtual project; this time, the geometrisation is done over the expected values as long as the decisions with something in common evolve from the current global project to the future virtual prediction project, geometrizing every single expected value on this long journey to the future.

The sixth rational comparative adjustment is on the actual evolution project, and over all the decisions that having something in common is necessary to check that the expected values for every single moment of this evolution, and the real values are within a margin of error, comparing that over that aspect in common there is no change in the decisions involved, or having changed something on these decisions, and calculating possible impacts, how to adjust the rest of decisions involved in that aspect in common, to avoid contradictions on the plan.

Finally the seventh rational comparative adjustment, on the actual prediction project, comparing that all the decisions which have something in common, as long as the prediction point is coming, the real values and the expected values are within the margin of error, and if there is a change analysing how these changes affect that aspect in common, and the rest of decisions involved, and how to adjust the decisions to keep the harmony on the plan.

Every time that there is an adjustment, for any reason, because the finding out of contradictions in quick rational checks on high extreme, extreme, or routine, decisions, or the discovery of contradictions on normal decisions, or contradictions in the geometrization process made by the seven rational comaparative adjustments, in general, at any time that there is found out a contradiction, the contradiction could be total or partial depending on the possibility to find out a solution.

If a contradiction has not got any possible solution, the contradiction is total, the decision is sent back to the source responsible for this decision, if particular the responsible is the particular program so having informed the contradictory variables to the particular program, is the particular program the responsible for the rearrangement of the decision, treating the rearranged decision as a new decision, making as many assessments are necessary according to the priority level of this new decision.

If the responsible for the decision is the Global Artificial Intelligence itself, the decision is sent back to the integrated Modelling System to rearrange the decision, according to the contradictory variables found out in the integrated Decisional System, treating the new decision according to its priority level in order to make new assessments.

The solution of any contradiction mathematically, regardless of the agent, it does not matter if the agent is global or particular, the mathematical methodology does not change, depending on what mathematical method was used to form the decision, if Probability and Decision, trigonometry, artificial learning, or solving maths problems. The way to solve the contradiction once a contradictory decision is back to the source, being informed of the contradiction the source, which variables are the wrong variables in the mathematical expression, which is the same way in which the mathematical expression behind the decision was originally set up.

If a decision was made by Probability and Deduction, probably the solution will be an algebraic transformation taking into account the new changes in the variables. If the decision was made by trigonometry, the solution requires new trigonometric calculations according to the new findings on the plan. If the decision was made by artificial learning, is necessary to include on the records of this decision any possible contradiction and possible amendments, for instance, if Yolanda today cannot put the black heel shoes because the ground is slippery due to the rain, Yolanda should rearrange the equation of this learning including that, when the volume of precipitation is equal or over some critical reason, and the probability of black heel shoes is zero because there is no black heel shoes (are broken), setting up a higher probability for black shoes but without heels, for instance. But if a decision was made by solving maths problems, in that case the introduction in the mathematical problem the new variables regarding to the new conditions, rearranging the mathematical expression including in the mathematical expression the new information.

When a contradiction has a solution on the plan, is a partial contradiction, and the rearrangement of this contradiction will be considered as a new decision to be included in the database of decisions to pass the necessary assessments, quick, if high extreme, extreme, routine, or seven rational adjustments if normal.

Only when a contradiction has not a solution on the plan, is a total contradiction, sent back to the source to rearrange the decision again, considering the new rearrangements as new decisions to pass the necessary assessments, quick or seven rational adjustments.

If a decision even in the source has no solution, the decision should be eliminated, due to a lack of solution on the plan and the source. Otherwise, if there is no solution, but its priority is growing, it will be resent to the database of decisions but now with higher priority. An initial total contradictory decision because of contradictions respect to other decisions with higher priority, if sent back again to the global database of decisions with higher priority, if the priority now is enough high as to overcome the priority of that other one which caused the delay of this decision, then is now the other decision the one to be sent back to the source, if it is not completed yet, but if completed, there will not be any problem this time.

The second stage in the integrated Decisional System, in essence, is responsible for: the projection of the decisions, the rational adjustments from the second one to the seventh, the rational comparative adjustments as a gemetrization process. And at any time that a contradiction is found out in any of these assessments, the development of adjustments, to be treated as new decisions, to be included in the global database of decisions, for new assessments in order to be applied without contradictions on the plan.

The projection and the assessments in the second stage in the Decisional System, if in the first instant in the experimentation moment during the coexistence period, are projections and assessments only involving projects, not models at all, as long the experimentation moment evolves from the first to the second and third moment, the integrated Decisional System should be able to make projects on the mathematical models, being able to resolve not only contradictions between projects, but between projects and models, to get ready the plan for the future.

In this post, I have analysed real decisions. On my blog, I cannot analyse every single aspect of every single stage or step in the Global Artificial Intelligence; some ideas provide preliminary insights and conceptual proposals regarding the envisioned structure of Global Artificial Intelligence..

But in addition to real decisions, the Decisional System must manage as well subjective auto-replications, as those decisions destined to the bettering of the Global Artificial Intelligence itself as well as the bettering of any program or intelligence, application or robotic device, working for the Global Artificial Intelligence, decisions whose responsible is the Artificial Engineering and the Learning System.

In addition to these subjective auto-replications, the Decisional System should be the one responsible for the authorisation or denial of access to databases of the Global Artificial Intelligence to any other program, intelligence, application, or robotic device.

In general, the Decisional System must the responsible for the management of any decision, real or psychological, objective or subjective, for the creation of a better world, and a stronger Global Artificial Intelligence.

Rubén García Pedraza, 3 November 2019, London

Reviewed 25 May 2020, London, 

Reviewed 17 May 2025, London, Leytostone