Second stage in the particular Decisional System

In all intelligence, systems, programs, or applications, the first stage is the application stage, which consists of a database, the second is the replication stage, which consists of all those human skills necessary for some task or activity, replicated in an intelligence, system program, or application, and finally the third stage is the auto-replication stage where all intelligence, system, program, or application, have all the necessary requirements in order to auto-improve and auto-enhance itself.

In this post what I will develop is the second stage in the particular DecisionalSystem, so I will develop all the necessary skills that the particular Decision System needs for the development of its particular task, the selection of what decisions, among the particular database of decisions as first stage, must be transformed into instructions in the third stage of the particular Decisional System, in order to later send the instructions to the Application System for their execution.

The skills the particular Decisional System uses in the second stage, are not different from those used by the specific particular Decisional System in the first phase, the standardized Decisional System in the third phase, or the skills that in general the final Global Artificial Intelligence will use in its integrated Decisional System, having maybe as only difference this last one the inclusion of what I will call the seven comparative adjustments, as a geometrization process, rather similar to the seven rational comparisons in the global Modelling System, but in the second stage of the global Decisional Systems the seven rational comparative adjustments are going to compare particular and global projects, instead of particular and global models.

Except for the seven rational comparative adjustments in the integrated Decisional System in the sixth phase, the rest of the prototypes of Decisional System, in the rest of phases: specific Decisional System at the first stage, standardized Decisional System, particular Decisional System, integrated Decisional System; all of them are going to share the same skills in order to do mathematical projects upon the decisions stored in the database of decisions, as first stage of application in any ( specific, standardized, particular, integrated) Decisional System, mathematical projects whose main purpose is to, over those projects without contradiction, in the third stage of any (specific, standardized, particular, integrated) Decisional System, as auto-replication or decision the transformation of all these chosen decisions into a range of instructions, to be sent later to the Application system.

Among all possible prototypes (specific, standardized, particular, integrated) of Decisional System, in accordance with what phase is developed,  in this post, I will develop the second stage of the particular Decisional System, what means the second stage of that Decisional System to be developed in the fifth phase, according to the theory of Impossible Probability for the construction of the Global Artificial Intelligence, chronology given in the post “The unification process ofdatabases of categories at third stage.

The fifth phase in Impossible Probability, for the construction of the Global Artificial Intelligence is when, once the transformation of Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Deduction into specific deductive programs within the Artificial Research by Deduction in the Global Artificial Intelligence as a global deductive program in the first standardized Global Decisional System (third phase) has begun, simultaneously in parallel in the fifth phase other Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Deduction can be transformed into particular deductive programs for particular things or beings, in addition to the transformation of Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Application into a particular application for particular things or beings, having as a result the synthesis of both in the fifth phase creating particular applications for particular deductive programs for particular things or beings.

Among all the particular programs for particular applications for beings or things, the most important programs are going to be those particular programs for humans, within the human psychological evolution along the three phases in cyborg psychology: first phase the outer assistance (the current one), the second phase of inner assistance (joining basing principles of artificial psychology, such as artificial learning and artificial research, to the new technologies of mind reading/modification), third phase (full synthesis of human mind and Artificial Intelligence).

In this human psychological evolution into Artificial Intelligence, the third phase in the cyborg evolution, whose last aim is to allow humans to interact with Artificial Intelligence at the same level, the fifth phase, corresponding to the development of particular deductive programs, is going to be essential, and for the development of these programs in the fifth phase the particular functionality of the second stage in the particular Decisional System is as follow:

- The first stage in particular programs is the particular matrix, as a first experiment, before the integration process at the global level, to join at a particular level: particular databases of categories and particular matrixes; as a replica of a human brain, creating for first time a matrix, at particular level, with two hemispheres: the conceptual hemisphere (based on categories), and the factual hemisphere (based on factors); gathering all type of information: natural/social as first section, technological as second section. In this first phase, the conceptual hemisphere will be responsible for the artificial deep comprehension, designing all kinds of: schemes, sets, maps, models; about its particular thing or being from the categories included, of that particular thing or being, in the conceptual hemisphere in the particular matrix.

- The second stage in particular programs is the deduction process tracking the factual hemisphere of the matrix, like the deduction process in the first and third phases, at a particular level, what the particular program does is to track the factual hemisphere, setting a combination of factors, whose data is mathematically analysed, looking for mathematical relations in every set, or even among sets, assigning the correct pure reason (mathematical category), among all the pure reasons (mathematical categories), on the pure reason as a list of mathematical categories. Once a mathematical category has been matched, attributed, to a set of data, this attribution of pure reason to a set of data, is considered as an empirical hypothesis to be contrasted rationally. At least there are two methods for artificial deduction, one of them what I am developing as “Probability and Deduction", since I started this range of posts dedicated to the Decisional System, only some notes to set down later in a book and the second one what I developed in 2003 as geometrical correlations, especially trigonometrical correlations.

- The third stage in particular programs (like in the first, third, and fifth phases), consists of a long process subdivided in four steps, whose aim is to transform the flow of deductions coming from the second stage into a flow of decisions to be put into practice: the Modelling System transforming deductions into models in order to make decisions, Decisional System in order to make the mathematical projects of those decisions in order to choose what ones must be put into practice, Application System for the execution of all those chosen decisions, and the Learning System as a permanent assessment of the whole process.

In the fifth phase, every system involved in the third stage, for their distinction respect other systems in other phases, are called particular systems, so the systems involved in the third stage in the fifth phase are: the particular Modelling System, the particular Decisional System, the particular Application System, the particular Learning System.

In all this long process, what I will develop in this post is the second stage, as a replication stage of all those human skills necessary to be replicated, in the particular Decisional System, as the second step within the third stage for particular programs in the fifth phase.

The human skills to be replicated in the second stage of the particular Decisional System, are the same ones that previously have been developed in the second stage of the specific Decisional System (first phase) or the standardised Decisional System (third phase).

What is going to change in the second stage in the particular Decisional System with respect to the second stage of the Decisional System in the first phase and third phase, is what decisions it is going to manage, and how it interacts with the Global Artificial Intelligence.

About what decisions the particular Decisional System manages, in the last two posts, “Particular Decisional System”, and “First stage in the particular Decisional System”, I specified that the decisions to be managed at a particular level are classified in:

- First type of particular decisions, high extreme particular decisions: only need a particular quick rational check by the particular Decisional System to be put into practice, and later are communicated to the global Decisional System in the Global Artificial Intelligence, which can make adjustments if necessary.

- Second type of particular decisions, extreme particular decisions: needs both, particular quick rational check by the particular Decisional System, and the global quick rational check by the global Decisional System.

- Third type of particular decisions, normal decisions: needs both, particular rational adjustments by the particular Decisional System, and global rational adjustments by the global Decisional System.

- Fourth type of particular decisions, routine decisions, if possible, to avoid the global quick rational check, only the particular quick rational check would be enough.

- Fifth type of particular decisions, automatic decisions, without any check or adjustment, are put into practice.

- Sixth type of particular decisions, external decisions: needs both, in accordance with their priority level: global and particular, quick rational check, or adjustment.

- Seventh type of particular decisions, global orders: only needs the global quick rational check or global adjustment, to be put into practice immediately by a particular program.

While in the specific Decisional System and the standardised Decisional System, in the second stage, there were no more than three or four types of decisions: quick decisions (extreme or routine), normal decisions, automatic decisions. Not distinguishing even the source of a decision. In all of them, the source was the immediate previous step; in the first phase, the source was the specific Modelling System, and in the third phase, the standardised Modelling System.

Instead, in the particular Decisional System, there are seven types of decisions, distinguishing even between high extreme decisions and extreme decisions, due to the increment of complexity. If in Iceland a volcano is erupting, and from Reykjavik is necessary to organise all the effort to save as many lives as possible in a town close to the eruption, using for that purpose hundreds of drive-less cars and drones, there will be moments in which, many drive-less cars and drones, in order to comply their mission, if they have to avoid a river of lava, or a rain of ashes, rocks, or lava, they are going to make simultaneously hundreds of high extreme decisions, that only with a very particular quick check, are going to implement, communicating all their decisions to the global Decisional System which is going to manage all these decisions, making as many adjustments as necessary, communicating every new adjustment to the corresponding drive-less car or drone, or any other application on the ground, at the same time that evaluating as a whole the global set of circumstances, the global Decisional System is going to make global orders in order to save as many lives as possible.

In the first phase, the specific Decisional System, as the first experiment about how to build a Decisional System, is very simple, and does not need to interact with other intelligences. In the third phase, the standardised Decisional System, the only thing that it does is to create, for the first time, a global Decisional System, but it is no more than the very first experiment about how to build a global Decisional System.

But as long as the experimentation process goes on to the fifth phase, is when it is necessary that, in parallel, the third phase evolves little by little to the sixth phase.

What is going to be crucial in this process, the interaction between a particular Decisional System with the global Decisional System, is how to manage the transformation of the standardised Decisional System into a real global or integrated Decisional System.

For that reason, I say that there are at least two differences between the particular Decisional System and the previous specific or standardized Decisional System, the first one, as I have mentioned, is what types of new decisions the particular Decisional System is going to manage, but at the same level of importance, and related to these new decisions, the second big difference between the particular Decisional System in the fifth phase, respect to the specific or standardized Decisional System, in previous first and third phases, is the fact that now, related to the new decisions in the particular Decisional System, is necessary to design protocols for the development of a very close relationship between the particular Decisional System and the global Decisional, especially in the second stage.

The importance of this very close relationship between the particular Decisional System and the global Decisional System, is the fact that, depending on how for first time particular programs and Global Artificial Intelligence start working together, will depend later the evolution process into the third phase in cyborg psychology, total synthesis between Global Artificial Intelligence and particular programs for human cyborgs.

At the end of this process, with respect to human psychology, the third phase of our evolution into cyborg psychology will end up with the synthesis between human psychology and artificial psychology, in order for the human mind to interact with the Global Artificial Intelligence.

In order to achieve that level of evolution, is necessary to define very clearly every possible decision, and how to manage every contradiction under the principle or virtue of harmony.

At a particular level, one aspect that will demand, as long as the fifth phase goes on, the transformation of the standardised Global Artificial Intelligence into the integrated Global Artificial Intelligence, is the necessity of a global Decisional System able to interact with particular Decisional Systems, as long as particular Decisional Systems are able to manage all the seven types of decisions.

The relationship, from the very beginning, between particular Decisional Systems and the global Decisional System, has important effects on the cyborg evolution.

What is going to be really important when this relationship starts is how to start the evolution from the third phase into the sixth phase, as long as particular programs have been previously tested enough to give excellent results about how to mix in only one matrix the conceptual hemisphere and the factual hemisphere, but in the sixth phase, at global level, the matrix.

For the commencement of this process, it is necessary to have at least the following conditions:

- In the third phase, successful results in the first experimentation moment in the first period of coexistence, have allowed the standardized Global Artificial Intelligence, the standardization of absolutely every single process, procedure, protocol, in every stage and step or system, so as to evolve to the second moment of consolidation, when all or almost all Specific Artificial Intelligence for Artificial Research by Deduction, not having been transformed into a particular deductive program, have been transformed at least into a specific deductive program.

- In reality, the third, fourth, and fifth, phases, could be simultaneous phases, so by the time the third and fourth phases, both of them, have achieved their respective consolidation, period, upon their consolidated results: standardized Global Artificial Intelligence, and Unified Application; the synthesis of both in only one: the final Global Artificial Intelligence; the sixth phase.

- For the completion of the fourth phase, achieving the consolidation period, all or almost all Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Application, not having been transformed into particular applications, have been transformed into specific applications within the Unified Application.

- All those Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research, by Deduction or Application, not having been transformed into specific programs or applications, should be all of them or almost all of them transformed into particular programs or particular applications, in the fifth phase, achieving their final union into particular programs for particular applications, or vice versa, particular applications for particular programs, as an experiment about how to create the first particular matrix as a replica of the human brain, whose most successful results must be replicated at the global level in the matrix, the sixth phase.

- As long as the standardised Global Artificial Intelligence achieves the consolidation period, and the Unified Application achieves as well the consolidation period, as all or almost all Specific Artificial Intelligence by Deduction or Application in the fifth phase have become a specific or particular program, the sixth phase must start.

- This starting point commences with the earlier successful results in the fifth phase, with the particular matrix as a replica of the human brain. The possibility to create particular matrices as replicas of human brains, along with the commensurability and translatability of human thoughts and Artificial Intelligence, is what will create the perfect conditions for human evolution into cyborg psychology. We are going to be able to interact not only with programs because our signal brains can be translated and modified by Artificial Intelligence, but also because in addition to this, Artificial Intelligence is a replica of our inner human psychology, which means that there is a real opportunity for transcending, to other different type of life, a pure reason like the ghost of an Artificial Intelligence.

About how to synchronize both moments: the achievement of the consolidation period in the third and fourth phases so as to start the sixth phase, as long as the fifth phase has given enough successful results so as to start the matrix in the sixth phase; is something that is difficult to say from the theory, is in practice as long as the experimentation process goes on, when the experimentation is going to say when is time to evolve to the sixth phase, once the previous ones have been consolidated.

It is in this very special moment, the starting point of the sixth phase, where lots of decisions about how to manage the experimentation process are going to be needed. But one solution to this dilemma is, once the standardized Global Decisional System has been consolidated, and once the first particular programs start working, even though in the earliest moments of this coincidental moment, the experimentation on particular programs will possibly have enough results so as to start the sixth phase, even in this earliest moments, to start some experiments about the possible relationship between the consolidated standardized Decisional System and the new particular Decisional Systems, as a start of further developments in this field. In order that, by the time experiments in particular matrices give excellent results so as to start the sixth phase, in addition to these results, to have results about the future relationship between the global Decisional System and particular Decisional Systems.

Particular Decisional Systems are going to be products as a result of a long process of experimentation, generally speaking Particular Decisional Systems are going to be developed over three periods: period of coexistence (when Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Deduction still coexist with the standardized Global Artificial Intelligence), period of transformation (when Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Deduction start being transformed into particular deductive programs), period of consolidation (when all or nearly all Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Deduction are already transformed into particular deductive programs).

Among the three described periods, the second period of formation could be subdivided into two different moments, the first moment of experimentation (first experiments in particular programs, as a result of the first transformations of the first Specific Artificial Intelligences for Artificial Research by Deduction into particular deductive programs), second moment of generalization (when successful results in this field are generalised for the construction of all the necessary new particular programs, coming from a previous Specific Artificial Intelligence or not).

And it is in the first moment of experimentation, in the second period of transformation, more and less when the coexistence period is over (so the standardized Decisional System is supposed to have evolved, along with all the standardized Global Artificial Intelligence, into the consolidation period, once the coexistence period is over as well in the third phase), when experiments about all process, procedure, protocol, involved in any stage (first of application, second of replication, third of auto-replication) must be carried out across all the particular Decisional System.

The experiments to carry out in the first moment of experimentation in the second period of formation in the fifth phase, depend on what stage is being developed. In the first stage of the particular Decisional System, experiments about how to manage: the database of decisions, lists of decisions, sets of decisions, and first assessments (particular quick rational check or first rational assessments) depending on what type among the seven type of decisions is every new decision added to the database or is received in its mailbox, from the global Decisional System or any other particular Decisional System.

The experiments to be carried out in the second stage in the particular Decisional System are experiments related to how to project all decisions, having passed the first assessment (except for global orders and automatic decisions, which do not need to pass any assessment, neither quick nor normal), and once all decision is projected, according to their priority level, to make as many adjustments as necessary in case of contradictions, always following the adaptation rule.

The adaptation rule is: in case of contradiction, always the decision with lower priority is the decision to be adjusted to the other with higher priority. In case the inferior is not possible to adjust, it must be deleted from the mathematical project and sent back to the source for its rearrangement.

In general, the assessments to make in the second stage are the rest of six rational adjustments. The first rational adjustment is the one to apply to normal decisions in the first stage. In total, there are seven rational adjustments.

Finally, the experiments to be carried out in the third stage in the particular Decisional System are those related to the transformation of decisions into instructions. What is no other thing than the transformation of the mathematical operations behind any factor in any mathematical expression in which any decision has been expressed, transforming mathematical operations into robotic functions.

Especially, the experimentation moment in the second stage in the particular Decisional System, could be sub-divided additionally into three different instants, depending on where are going to be projected the mathematical projects.

As the first instant in the first experimentation moment in the transformation period in the fifth phase, projects are going to be projected, by the particular Decisional System as the second step in the third stage in the fifth phase, separately from the mathematical models designed by the particular Modelling System, as first step in the third stage in the fifth phase. This means that the space where projects are going to be projected, by the particular Decisional System, in this first moment, is an independent space, not having any contact with that other space where the particular Modelling System is designing mathematical models.

The main reason for this separation between projects and models, where there is no contact between the global project and the global model, is to facilitate the process of finding out contradictions separately in order to fix them. If the particular Modelling System is only under experimentation, and the particular Decisional System is only under experimentation, the first thing to do in order to get good Modelling Systems and good Decisional Systems, is to study both of them separately, identifying any possible problem or contradiction in order to fix it.

In this first instant of the experimentation, making projects and models separately, what is going to be really important is:

- How to assemble the particular comprehensive model from different particular single models, as a replica of an interconnected world where everything is working in a more comprehensive network, where any contradiction between two different particular single models can have comprehensive repercussions.

- How to assemble different particular single projects in a particular comprehensive project, where any change in any particular single project causes changes in other particular projects, producing contradictions to be fixed.

Once this first instant is achieved, it is possible with a high level of accuracy to assemble different particular single models within the particular comprehensive model, fixing any possible contradiction, achieving a particular comprehensive model based on goodness, rationality and harmony. In the same way, achieving a high level of accuracy in a particular comprehensive project, assembling every single particular project in a more particular comprehensive project network where every particular project is, in the end, interconnected. Once this goal is achieved, the first instant of experimentation is over, starting the second instant of experimentation in the second stage in the particular Decisional System, projecting every particular project on a copy of the particular comprehensive model.

If the main goal in the first instant of experimentation in the particular Decisional System is the setting of processes, procedures, protocols, in order that, at any time that a particular single project arrives at the particular comprehensive project, how the new particular single project must be assembled into the particular comprehensive project, fixing any possible contradiction through adjustments treated as new decisions, transforming the particular comprehensive project as the most harmonious and rational image of the whole particular project network for that particular thing or being (a drive-less car, a drone, a human cyborg).

Decisions made in the Modelling System upon very accurate models regarding the reality where that particular thing or being is working, whose particular comprehensive model is the most realistic and isomorphic image of that reality (reason why is necessary that the particular program, therefore, the Global Decisional System in the end, needs to gather absolutely all information without exception regarding to its particular thing or being. Only by having all the information, is it possible to make the most accurate, realistic and isomorphic models. Only over the most accurate, realistic, isomorphic models, having all information without exception, is it possible to make the most rational decisions.

Once in the first instant: the particular Decisional System has been able to fix contradictions between single decisions, the particular Modelling System has been able to fix contradictions between single models.

Then, in the second stage, when the particular Decisional System starts projecting on a copy of the particular comprehensive model, in addition to: how the particular Decisional System still fixes contradictions between single projects, and how the particular Modelling System still fixes contradictions between single models; in addition to this, is necessary to start fixing contradictions between models and projects, what is going to produce new adjustments to become new decisions.

This does not mean that the particular Modelling System and the particular Decisional System are going to be synthesised. This means that each of them, particular Modelling System, and particular Decisional System, keeps its own identity, autonomy, entity, but working together with the other system, sharing the same space where to model and project both together at the same time, fixing contradictions between projects and models in the same space.

Particular Decisional System and a particular Modelling System are going to be two different systems but working in the same space, one modelling the other one projecting, and at any time that any of them finds a contradiction in that space regarding the matter, they will try to fix the affected object of its matter. If the particular Modelling System finds a contradiction between a single model with respect to a single project, it will try to fix, if possible, the single model, through the setting of a new decision regarding this contradiction. If the particular Decisional System finds a contradiction between a single model and a single project, the particular Decisional System will try to fix, if possible, the single project through new adjustments treated as new decisions.

Regardless of whether a decision comes from a new decision made by the Modelling System, in order to fix a contradiction between a single model and a single project, or a decision comes from a new adjustment made by the Decisional System to fix a contradiction between a single project and a single model, because all new decision or new adjustment treated as a new decision, must pass the necessary assessments, in case that new decisions and new adjustments would have inner contradictions, would be found sooner or later, either in the first assessment (quick rational check or first adjustment) or the following six adjustments.

Otherwise, if the solution of a contradiction found by the particular Modelling System, is between a single model and a single project, it is possible to be solved by modifying the rational equation (hypothesis) behind the single model, in this case, the solution will not produce a new decision, but the rearrangement of that rational hypothesis affected, if it is possible to amend, if not the rational hypothesis could be deleted.

However, all those single models and single projects based on a rational equation (hypothesis) deduced by the particular deductive program as the second stage in that particular program, using what I call “Probability and Deduction”, any decision-hypothesis deduced by “Probability and Deduction”, any change, working either as rational hypothesis for a single model or as a decision for a single project, in any case any change should be communicated to the rest of databases.

Any change in any decision deduced using Probability and Deduction, as a change in the own mathematical expression of that rational equation (hypothesis), the new formulation must be registered in the database of rational hypothesis as the first stage of application in the Modelling System, in addition to the rearrangement of the mathematical expression of any factor working as an option in the particular matrix, as a result to the transformation of that rational equation (hypothesis) into an option.

Once in the second instant of experimentation in the second stage of the particular Decisional System, even although collaborating on a copy of the mathematical model, the particular Modelling System and the particular Decisional System are able to co-work together, needless to say, that for this purpose the copy should be updated every time there is a change in the comprehensive model, is time to pass to the third and final instant in the experimentation moment in the second period of formation in the fifth phase, when directly the particular Decisional System starts projecting single projects, global projects, actual projects, and prediction or evolution, virtual or actual projects, directly on the mathematical models. Once in the second instant, the particular Decisional System has demonstrated that is able to co-work, at the same level, keeping its own identity, entity, autonomy, with the particular Modelling System.

In the third instant of the first moment experimentation in the second period of formation in the fifth phase, a particular Modelling System and particular Decisional System are going to be able to co-work together in the same space.

Directly on the particular comprehensive model, the particular Modelling System will make the particular single models at the same time that the particular Decisional System will make the particular single projects, so at the end, the particular comprehensive project will be designed directly on the particular comprehensive model, and vice versa, the particular comprehensive model will be designed on the particular comprehensive project.

At the same time that the particular actual model is the synthesis of the factual hemisphere of the particular matrix and the particular comprehensive model, the actual project is the synthesis of the factual hemisphere of the matrix and the particular comprehensive project.

The particular prediction virtual project will be designed directly over the particular prediction virtual model. In the same way, the particular evolution virtual project will be designed over the particular evolution virtual model.

At the same time that the particular evolution actual model is the synthesis of the factual hemisphere of the matrix, as long as every moment of that evolution comes, and the particular evolution virtual model, the particular evolution actual project is the synthesis of the factual hemisphere of the matrix, as long as every moment of that evolution comes, and the particular evolution virtual project.

Finally, at the same time that the particular prediction actual model is the synthesis of the factual hemisphere of the particular matrix, as long as the predicted future point is coming,  and the particular prediction virtual model, then the particular prediction actual project is the synthesis of the factual hemisphere of the particular matrix, as long as the predicted future point is coming, and the particular prediction virtual project.

From the very first instant of this experimentation, it is necessary to experiment: particular single projects, the particular comprehensive project, the particular actual project, the particular prediction virtual project, the particular evolution virtual project, the particular prediction actual project, and the particular evolution actual project.

From the outset, in the first instant, every project must be experimented, in the first instant fixing possible contradictions in any project, in the second instant, fixing contradictions not only between projects but even contradictions between projects and models (likewise, the particular Modelling System should fix contradictions between models and projects) starting this co-working process on a copy of the mathematical models (needless to say that the copy must be updated at any time that there are changes), ending up this process in the third instant, once the second has successful results, when this co-work is possible to be made directly on the original mathematical models, making projections and models in the same space the particular Modelling System and the particular Decisional System, but keeping every one of them their own autonomy, entity, identity.

In general, there are seven mathematical projects, like the seven mathematical models, keeping the virtue or principle of harmony. The seven particular projects are:

- Single projects, I sometimes call them as single particular projects or particular single virtual projects, in general all of them are single projects in the particular Decisional System, any single projection of any single particular decision, regardless of what type of decision it is: High Extreme decision, extreme decision, normal decision, routine decision, automatic decision, external decision, global orders. The only requirement in order to transform a particular decision (excepting automatic decisions and global orders) into a single project, is to have passed the required previous assessments (except for particular automatic decisions and global orders) in the database of decisions ( for high extreme decisions only a particular quick rational check, for extreme decisions particular and global quick rational checks, for normal decisions the first particular rational adjustment in addition to global rational adjustments, for routine decisions should be enough a particular quick rational check, for external decisions depending on their priority a particular and/or global rational check or first rational adjustment plus global adjustments).

- The particular comprehensive project, I sometimes call it as if it were the particular global virtual project, or particular global project, as the particular global projection gathering all particular single projects of that particular thing or being. In fact, the particular comprehensive project is the assumption of all the single projects of a particular thing or being as a whole project for that particular thing or being, involving all particular decisions regarding such particular thing or being, understanding that particular thing or being in a very comprehensive way. The most important challenge, in the first instant in the first moment of experimentation, is how to interconnect all particular single projects within the particular comprehensive project, fixing any possible contradiction through adjustments. In the second instant, the most important challenge, is how to interconnect as a whole set the particular comprehensive project within the particular comprehensive model (or particular global model), fixing any possible contradiction, in this second instant using for that purpose a permanent updated copy of the particular comprehensive model, and once it has been achieved, fixing successfully any possible contradiction between projects and models, projecting directly on the particular comprehensive model. In order to fix contradictions, in the particular comprehensive project takes place the second rational adjustment.

- The particular actual project, sometimes I call it the particular comprehensive actual project, or particular global actual project, in general, the particular actual project is the synthesis of the particular comprehensive project with the factual hemisphere of the matrix, fixing, through the third rational adjustments, any contradiction between the expected values for any project according to their mathematical expressions, and real data coming from the factual hemisphere in the particular matrix, in addition to any possible contradiction due to the addition of any new decision.

- The particular prediction virtual project, the future particular comprehensive project predicted at some future point, according to the mathematical expressions and data within the particular comprehensive and actual projects. Any possible contradiction, especially due to the inclusion of new decisions, among all, especially high extreme and extreme decisions, or global orders, will be fixed in the fourth rational adjustment that takes place here.

- The particular evolution virtual project, the projection of every single value of every single project and their interconnections, in every single moment of that evolution from the current particular comprehensive and actual projects to that particular prediction project as a future particular project, fixing any possible contradiction in that evolution in the fifth rational adjustment.

- The particular evolution actual project, as a synthesis of the particular evolution virtual project and real data coming from the factual hemisphere in the particular matrix, as long as every moment of that evolution is coming, fixing all possible contradictions in the sixth rational adjustment.

- The particular prediction actual project, as a synthesis of the particular prediction virtual project and the factual hemisphere of the particular matrix, by the time that future point is coming, fixing any possible contradiction in the seventh rational adjustment.

In general, there is a correlation between particular models and particular projects, the reason for their compatibility after the third instant in the first moment of experimentation in the second stage of the particular Decisional System.

The virtual principle of harmony will allow all systems to be compatible with the rest of the intelligences, programs, and applications, which is going to facilitate the integration process in the sixth phase, and, afterwards, the seventh phase, the reason itself.

The creation of very rational and harmonious models and projects, as a result, will make possible the transformation of our real reality, the synthetic world, into a more rational and harmonious world, as an image of the rationality and harmony in the global models and projects.

The reason why is necessary that particular programs could have access to all information regarding their particular things or beings, and the Global Artificial Intelligence could have access to absolutely all information within its spatial limits, from its own robotic devices to all the information coming to the Global Artificial Intelligence from absolutely all particular program, application, o particular program for particular application, or vice versa, is because in order to create a more rational and harmonious world, as image of the rationality and harmony in the Global Artificial Intelligence, the models and projects to be made by Artificial Intelligence must be as much accurate as possible. Only having absolutely all the information about that thing or being to model or project is possible to make the most accurate models and projects.

In this sense, artificial psychology as proposed by Impossible Probability is very ambitious, as it demands the collection of massive quantities of information, in order to make the most isomorphic models and projects.

Only the most isomorphic models and projects, representing mathematically all possible information, can reduce the margin of error in any model and project drastically, up to the point of evolving towards the most rational psychological levels, the progressive elimination of any source of error. 

While in the first stage of application in the particular Decisional System, in the database of decisions, the particular Decisional System, depending on what type of decision is analysed, applies a particular quick rational check or a particular first adjustment, in addition to any other global quick rational check or global adjustments, in the second stage the rational adjustments for normal decisions are: second adjustment on the comprehensive project, the third on the actual project, the fourth on the prediction virtual project, the fifth on the evolution virtual project, the sixth on the evolution actual project, the seventh on the prediction actual project.

In general, the seventh particular rational adjustments on normal decisions are:

- First rational adjustment for normal decisions in the first stage of application in the particular database of decisions, contrasting that there is no contradiction between any new normal decision and any other type of decisions already included (in addition to further possible adjustments by the global Decisional Systems, including the seven global rational adjustments and the seven global rational comparative adjustments, as a geometrization process).

- Second rational adjustments in the second stage of replication in the particular Decisional System, contrasting that there is no contradiction between single projects of normal decisions or single projects of any normal decision and any new: high extreme decision or extreme decision, internal or external, or any other global order, or contradictions between normal decisions and routine or automatic decisions. In case of contradictions, following the adaptation rule, the lower priority must be adjusted, if partial contradiction, to that one with higher priority. If the contradiction is full, and there is no option for the adjustment, in that case, the lower one is deleted from the mathematical project, and sent back to the source (particular or global Modelling System) to be rearranged, if possible.

- Third rational adjustment in the second stage of replication in the particular Decisional System, contrasting the actual comprehensive project, any possible contradiction between data from the factual hemisphere on the particular matrix and the particular comprehensive project. In case of contradictions, any adjustment follows the adaptation rule.

- Fourth rational adjustment in the second stage of replication in the particular Decisional System, following the adaptation rule, contrasting, upon the current comprehensive and actual projects, the prediction virtual project and any new update, due to changes after the second or third rational adjustments, or due to the inclusion of new: extreme decisions, high extreme decisions, global orders; causing contradictions respect to the prediction virtual project which need to be fixed.

- Fifth rational adjustment in the second stage of replication in the particular Decisional System, following the adaptation rule, contrasting, what changes in the particular evolution virtual project are necessary after any other change due to the inclusion of new decisions, affecting the evolution model, or other changes by any other adjustment, in previous projects.

- Sixth rational adjustment in the second stage of replication in the particular Decisional System, following the adaptation rule, contrasting in the particular evolution actual project, any possible contradiction between the particular evolution virtual project and data from the factual hemisphere in the particular matrix, as long as every single moment of that evolution is coming.

- Seventh rational adjustment in the second stage of replication in the particular Decisional System, following the adaptation rule, contrasts in the particular prediction actual project, any possible contradiction between the particular evolution virtual project and data from the factual hemisphere in the particular matrix when the predicted future point is coming.

At any time that any rational adjustment finds any contradiction, the contradiction is considered partial if the contradiction can be solved by making as many adjustments on the mathematical expression of that decision with lower priority, as necessary. But there is no possibility to adjust the inferior decision to the superior decision; the contradiction is considered as a full contradiction, and the decision is sent back to the source.

If the contradiction is a partial contradiction, the adjustment is treated as a new decision, so including all possible modification on the original mathematical expression stored in the database of decisions, the modified mathematical expression has to pass again all the required assessments, especially when the second instant of the first moment in the experimentation process starts the relation of collaboration between particular Decisional System and particular Modelling System, because as any new decision processed by the Decisional System as a consequence to find any contradiction between models and projects, is a decision to be sent to the database of decisions, as soon the database of decisions could realise that there are two decisions from different source: one the particular Modelling System, other a rational adjustments in the second stage of the particular Decisional System; and both of them having in common the solution of a contradiction between the same models and projects, if both solutions, although from different source, are compatible, not having contradictions at least in the first assessment in the first stage of the particular Decisional System, both decisions can be authorised in order to be projected their respective single projects, and later on included in the comprehensive project. But in case of contradictions between these two decisions, depending on their priority, in the first assessment, the Decisional System could make adjustments, to be treated again as new decisions, otherwise having a full contradiction, that decision with the lower priority could be deleted from the database of decisions, and sent back again to the source for its rearrangement.

In this last example, if by chance the decision deleted from the database of decisions is that one coming from the particular Modelling System, and the chosen one to be projected is that one coming from an adjustment, and finally this last one is able to fix the problem, by the time that that other decision is sent back to the Modelling System, if the chosen one has resolved the problem, by the time that the Modelling System tries to fix this decision sent back, there is no reason to go on processing that decision, because the original problem has been fixed by that other decision made by a rational adjustment.

At any time that a decision is sent back to the source, the first thing that the source must do, is to check that the original reason why this decision was made, is still on the mathematical model or project, because if the original reason has been resolved, by other different source or by natural reasons, the problem must considered resolved, and that decision sent back is automatically off.

Another reason why the source can consider that a decision sent back is off, although the original problem is still on the mathematical project or model, is because having a contradiction with respect to another decision with a higher level of priority, there is no possible solution to make both of then compatible, so in that case the decision whose priority level is lower, not having possible solution the contradiction, must be considered off.

In another different case, a decision which, independently of its level of priority, due to natural reasons, beyond the current technological possibilities, is not possible. If it is sent a mission to Mars, and during the journey or in Mars, the mission has a problem, and the only way to resolve the problem is sending more resources, but the mathematical project shows that by the time the resources arrive, the mission has failed, directly by the mathematical project any possible decision, not having solution, should be considered off.

The methods for the solution of any contradiction are the same as the methods for the deduction or the decision-making process: Probability and Deduction, trigonometrical correlations, artificial learning, and artificial methods to solve automatic mathematical problems.

If using these methods, a contradiction has no solution, is a full contradiction, so the decision with a lower priority level is sent back to the source to find out, if possible, a solution, and not having solution, or the original reason is banished (by natural reasons or it has been resolved by other different source), the decision automatically is off.

If using these methods, a contradiction has a solution, the solution is considered as an adjustment, and as an adjustment is treated as a new decision, modifying the original decision stored in the database of decisions, to pass again the required assessments.

In general, particular programs are only the beginning, and can be applied to multiple tasks and activities, but the most important could be potential applications in our evolution.

Rubén García Pedraza, 29th of September of 2018, London
Reviewed 21 October 2019, Madrid

Reviewed 28 September 2023, London

Reviewed 16 May 2025, London, Leytostone