[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your reply!

Most of the types of complexity listed in that appendix appear to be limited or special cases of AIC, and therefore fall under its umbrella.

That’s the impression I got also!

There has been some mathematical effort in the last three years or so to unify all the concepts of "complexity" found in various places. I believe there are now quite a few proofs that strongly suggest AIC is the grand-daddy of all "complexity", and the more work that is done, the stronger this assertion is. I made this conjecture back in the late 90s (and I wasn't the first), but it seems that others have actually taken the effort to prove it.

Kudos to you on seeing it ahead of the pack!

IMHO, for what we are exploring in “biological autonomous self-organizing complexity” it is crucial to have agreement on the terms. Seems to me the classic bitstream interpretation of KC lacks the dimensionality (my term) to tell us anything useful. The dynamic system application would be more relevant.

But to express the complexity/entropy of the genetic code, it also sounds reasonable to me that the hierarchical nature of phrasing ought to be a factor. That is where I found the proposal beginning at pdf page 17 of this pdf to be most interesting! I’d appreciate your reaction, if you’d care to share.

[tortoise]

Seems to me the classic bitstream interpretation of KC lacks the dimensionality (my term) to tell us anything useful. The dynamic system application would be more relevant.

Definitely. But most of our understanding of KC has generally been limited to the classical "pattern KC" aspect, so most people don't know much about the mathematics of the dynamic "system" KC. It has only really become a properly supported area of mathematics as a result of people in artificial intelligence research taking an interest to it as of late, which shined enough light on the area for other people to take interest in it.