Meta-Dimensional Roles

Rough Draft

Summary: In this section we go through the basic architecture of the model. The general descriptions in this section is toward applying the quadranym theories to programing applications.

Below is a small list of types of meta-dimensional roles, slide 1.17.

Meta-Dimensional Roles:

slide 1.17

Slide037Q system analysis maps inferences between content and Meta-Dimensional Roles (M-roles). This forms a network of dynamical contexts that is then used to map inferences to objective fields for specific situational contexts, as we will see later.

M-roles are basic to Q-units:

Coherent Bias(x).

  1. [Coherent(self) ≥ Conditional(world)](x)
  2. [Inclusive(actual) ≥ Exclusive(potential)](x)
  3. [Potential(inclusive) ≥ Actual(exclusive)](x)
  4. [Active(function) ≥ Passive(structure)](x)
  5. [General(coherent) ≥ Particular(conditional)](x)
  6. [Possible(attitude) ≥ Necessary(object)](x)

All systems using Meta-Dimensional Roles must follow this axiom:

Q axiom:

The Q Categorical Axiom:

  1. Mode: potential ≥ actual
  2. State: actual ≥ potential
  • To come upon any mode is to always come upon a potential action, a potential action has a difference, it is always an actual difference.
  • To come upon any state is to always come upon an actual being, an actual being has a becoming, it is always a potential becoming.

To help clarify, consider that a mode is always potential, such that, identifying any potential automatically identifies the related actual. For instance, if the mode is then up, it needs not be up, since it has an actual difference, down. A state does not function in this way, a states becoming is any number of possible conditions.

All Q-units are fashioned to this simple axiom.

M-Roles remain in their sequence. For instance, negative is always the superset state: negative pertains to constraints or synergies to maintain the bias of ‘those‘ conditions. To be clear, a coherent bias is a negative factor or constraint at its contextual core.

The one exception applies to modes:

  • Switched Polarity. Notice in the list of meta-dimensional roles, the modes positive and negative are reversible, (- ⊕ +). A difference can be in some context of a topic either, negative or positive. For instance, if the mode is then not-up, it needs not be not up, since it has an actual difference, not-down.
  1. Standard Polarity:[Positive(self) ≥ Negative(world)]
  2. Switched Polarity:[Negative(self) ≥ Positive(world)]

Modes & States:  It is easy to loose sight of what a mode is and what a state is when engaged in any complex engineering project, for instance, building trains, planes or brains. The Q system keeps modes and states straight thus improving the tractability of categorical judgements in a system.

  • A mode is an active response to a state of a being.


Polynyms are another way to think about topical dimensions. Polynyms are simply a way to strategically think about concepts. Human operators relate to polynyms with good old fashion human intuition no axioms necessary. Knowing the number of dimensions in a polynym, for instance,  4, 7, or 9 dimensions gives human Q operators clues on how efficiently scripts are running. The number of polynym dimensions needed will change.

In this next group there are 7 polynym dimensions. They are represented as predicates. This group represents a strategy to approach the subjects of space; for instance, position, relation, movement, transition, sequence, period, empty, in, out, full, infinite, barrier, objects, event, passage, size, distance, up, down, high, low, blank, over, under, and so on. These clusters can then be used to ground meaning in the theme-topics of stories,  functioning as a kind of image schema to ground concepts in meaningful ways.

Each of the 7 predicate dimensions below has sub dimensions. As already mentioned, dealing with those sub dimensions is the job of quadranym units.

Spatial Domain: A 7 dimension polynym.

  1. Space(x)
  2. Distance(x)
  3. Direction(x)
  4. Door(x)
  5. Container(x)
  6. Energy(x)
  7. Time(x)

Each polynym dimension is a predicate and can be given a special kind of subject in the form of Q units.

slide 1.18

Slide2Quadranyms can be represented as reference frames. Between is in an area called the objective field. This is where the conditions of any topic are found. In this case, this is where the conditions of space are found. The coherent is the zero-point of space.

The Coherent Bias:

slide 1.19

Slide086The coherent bias is essentially blind to itself. It can be thought of as the point of the observer. As a zero-point, it is like an experiential trace of the observer. The observer sees things as they simply appear in correlation with naive perception. As stated, these appearances become judgements called naive standpoints: simple judgments made about the world. The Q will optimize these judgments in a system. One approach that we touched on is called prototypicality, another is called the ubiquitous approach:

  • Coherent bias: The entity void is ubiquitous to the topic of space by virtue of void’s singular principle in every condition of space.
  • Condition: The entity between is a multiplicity of principles and changing objective properties.

Normalized categorical relations form normalized layers

coherent conditional = singular plurality

For topic Space: Naive Standpoint<find>Coherent-Condition

Ideally, quadranyms are metaphorical sources to ground abstract targets of a theme-topic, for instance, love: “I am at the threshold of love[4]”, “I am in love[5]”, “I will love you forever[7,1]”, “My heart is full[5]”, “Nothing can stop our love[6]”.

  1. (∀x) space(x) ⟹ [Infinite(void)  Finite(between)(x)]
  2. (∀x) direction(x) ⟹ [From(position) To(relation)(x)]
  3. (∀x) distance(x) ⟹ [Far(position) Near(relation)(x)]
  4. (∀x) door(x) ⟹ [Open(passage) Close(barrier)(x)]
  5. (∀x) container(x) ⟹ [Out(empty) In(full))(x)]
  6. (∀x) energy(x) ⟹ [Active(motion) Passive(matter)(x)]
  7. (∀x) time(x) ⟹ [Future(present)  Past(event)(x)]
  • Spatial domain: Infinite
  • Emotional domain: Affection

M-role: love space, Mode: space, State: love

  • (∀x) Love(x) ⟹ [Infinite(affection)  Finite(object)(x)]

Q-units & Objective Fields:

Consider this statement, “I prepared you a nice bird“. In our country that often refers to a turkey. In other countries it might be whatever bird is commonly used as poultry.  These kinds of categorical ambiguities come up all the time. Humans know these things. In a sense, the Q system is a way for machines to dream about the things humans know.

The word bird, as illustrated earlier, has a coherent core, robin. The dimensions are normalized based on organismically experienced interactions with the world.

slide 1.20

Slide08As already stated, the objective field is the place where all the potential conditions are found. Coherent terms envelop the content of the O-field. However, the O-field can develop its own networks. The Q is heuristic where the O-field is deliberative. It might be helpful to think of the coherent sense as the kick starter to meaning, and the conditional sense as the tipping point to meaning.

slide 1.21


Conditions are the world potentials. The coherent bias interacts with those conditions. Below, The system deliberates on the food status of bird from within the coherent bias of eat. Bird and eat square off. In a Q-unit, the condition food is criticized, the coherent hungry is selected. Inside a Q-unit a coherent bias cannot be criticized, outside, it can be by other Q-units (other-coherents).

slide 1.22

Slide041Conditions cluster. Q units help this process by creating heuristic inferences. Below, the prototypical bird is rejected as, the bird. Robin is not a bird to this particular bias.

slide 1.23


A distinction is made between how situational contexts are represented and how dynamical contexts are represented. In reality, these contexts usually form at the same time. The Q represents the dynamical contexts. Conditions represent the situational contexts. Situational inferences can be represented in a semantic network. Conditions of a semantic network can include nodes and directed edges.

slide 1.24


Notice in illustration, Q units are like a meta system over situational conditions.

Q Scripts:

Quadranyms and Semantic Networks are representations to help arrange knowledge for Q scripts. The former for dynamical contexts the latter for situational contexts.

As stated, scripts can either continue linearly or divide into polynym dimensions. As always, it depends on the task.

slide 1.25


For instance, if one is hungry a script can form in relation to the conditions of the environment. So, if one is on an island full of coconut trees then a particular script between the coherent bias and the conditions form, and then it splits strategically so to easily access the different frame elements of the script and run them simultaneously. Below we have 5 polynyms as a strategy to enact this interaction.

  • Bias(x)
  • motivate(x)
  • task(x)
  • modify(x)
  • manipulate(x)

The scripts are used to gather, crack open and eat coconuts. The polynym and scripts specific to this task can be repurposed for different tasks.

slide 1.26


Scripts run differently for different goals. The system learns to become frugal with time and energy. Sometimes it runs linearly other times simultaneously. Scripts run at different rates. For instance, [IF eat THEN rock] will have a higher rate of change then [IF eat THEN coconut]. Each Q unit’s rate of change will pertain to a larger purpose.

slide 1.27


Notice rock and flesh in the script above in brackets. Notice that rock in the left bracket is a conditional term and in the right becomes a coherent term. The words stayed the same but the attributes changed. Notice that the predicates changed, it went from describing rock as hard to describing rock as a tool.


There are two basic ways to look at values in a Q system as we will see next in ideas for programing, script values and Q values. Script values emerge through procedures. Any condition can become a temporary value two complete procedures. In other words, when a passive condition becomes an active condition, it has value in that moment, it emerges naturally in the interaction. A Q value, is a human value, a place to begin that which is important. for instance, hard-rock is a value when it is a tool-rock to open coconuts.

Ideas For Programing:

Below is a basic list of rules for Q scripts.

Script rules:

  1. All the predicate roles/criteria of a Q system can be used.
  2. Predicate roles/criteria can move between senses of a polynym.
  3. Predicate roles/criteria must stay in their original set categories.
  4. Positive-Negative Predicates/modes is the one exception to rule 3.
  5. Any content source can be used to provide conditional subjects.
  6. Outside content sources can be used only for conditional subjects.
  7. The previous conditional subject must become the next coherent subject.
  8. The predicate of the next coherent set must change (see rule 3).
  9. New predicate and subject queries next set of conditions.
  10. Final child quadranym must justify (align) with parent quadranym.

Wordnet contains the word blank as one of the senses of space. How can blank come to align with Q space: the spatial script runs and picks up at container. The dimensional clusters are represented as {…}. Every dimension is its own cluster to fill the script.

Space <find>Blank:

  • [Out{…}(empty{…}) ≥ In{…}(full{…})]<find>
  • [From{…}(full{…}) ≥ To{…}(relation{…})]<find>
  • [Out{…}(relation{…}) ≥ In{…}(space{…})]<find>
  • [Active{…}(space{…}) ≥ Passive{…}(place{…})]<find>
  • [Out{…}(place{…}) ≥ In{…}(between{…})]<find>
  • [Active{…}(between{…}) ≥ Passive{…}(off{…})]<find>
  • [Active{…}(off{…}) ≥ Passive{…}(on{…})]<stop>
  1. Parent: (∀x) space(x) ⟹ [Infinite(void)  Finite(between)](x)
  2. Child: (∀x) blank(x) ⟹ [Active(off) Passive(on)](x)

Critical Assessment: Does the child justify? Are there any useful Q units inside the script body? Should another script run using different conditions?

The analysis of Blank creates a child Q of the parent space – it justifies with space. The child can begin forming its own polynym. The predicate describes the kind of subject, in this case, the kind of off, Active(off). The conditional predicate describes the kind of on. Passive(on)Blank can form new scripts.

  • Blank:[Active(off) ≥ Passive(on)]
  • Blank:[Active(unmarked) ≥ Passive(marked)]


Each Q-unit establishes a categorical bias from which a contextual trace may infer a word sense. Robin is a categorical bias of bird types from which the word bird is inferred.

  • A coherent-state is a being robin.
  • A conditional-state is a becoming bird type.
  • A mode-action in expansive sense of measure.
  • A mode-action in reductive sense of measure.

slide 1.28


The modes are the difference-lenses between two states.

Below, the category of motion is coupled to the category of matter:{physical objects, psychological objects, weight, force, movement, location, locomotion, push, pull…}.

slide 1.29


As stated, any mode is a difference: IF potential difference THEN actual difference. These differences are best describes in spatial terms.

  • Potential(expansive): Action and Measure
  • Actual(reductive): Action and Measure

slide 1.30

Slide034Below is the basic Quadranym Square (aka, Memetic Square). The Q unit can be described as memetic due to its virality and changeability. The catalyst to the Q approach is that we are wired to connect and the Q focus is on the dynamicity of words more so then the specificity.

slide 1.31


We end the overview with a Q concepts called hemispheres: Slide 1.32 & 1.33

The term, hemispheres refers to the ontological division represented in every Q-unit. Consider the illustration below, quadranyms are divided between two ontologies.

The ontologies are not what is being said to actually exist in the mind, what exists is our relationships to things in the world. Subjective and Objective ontologies are a strategic convenience and nothing more.

  • The dual ontologies of a Q is a way to classify a single experience as a dynamical process of something directly known, it’s an interpretation of an experiential monad.

slide 1.32


In the illustration above. A Venus Q unit has taken shape in modern terms. Notice use of concept as coherent factor VS. truth conditions as conditional factors.

  • The Subjective Ontology refers to active sameness to which more experience is necessary. This can also be referred to as the Active Hemisphere,
  • The Objective Ontology refers to passive sameness to which no more experience is necessary. This can also be referred to as the Passive Hemisphere.

Hemispheres are in relation to oscillation between coherent and conditional states. A quadranym is a way to take a snap shot of this dynamic.

Consider the illustration below, the potential of any condition is no more experience necessary. The response to that is more experience necessary to build currency. Currency is an analogy of the resources necessary to resolve conflicts between the coherent and conditional senses.

  • The condition is always the reference.
  • The coherent is always the zero-point.

slide 1.33


Q System = Reimagining The Content Of The World.

slide 1.34


The quadranym word-sensibility model is a different kind of categorical analysis of lexical content. The aim is to optimally and concisely represent the relationships of contextual units. It is simple, recursive and deep. The best part is, that the quadranym and polynym interfaces can be designed for easy and accessible public participation.

The quadranym if given careful ontological design can be set up as a complete knowledge base system, or it can be set up like a corpus collecting disparate quadranym data form representing only knowledge fragments. Collecting independent Quadranym and Polynym contributions adds to the knowledge base.


¬¬¬¬¬¬unedited work saved below¬¬¬¬¬

Word-Sensibility in a Nutshell: In our approach, the responsiveness of a word belongs to mental contexts that correlate with lived interactions. In the system, words come into their roles forming responsive dynamics on different hierarchical levels in different domains. Interacting responsive dynamics between domains yields metaphorical opportunities. Central to this process is the idea that there is the immanent and what necessarily must transcend the immanent, by which this implicates the skills, volition and resources that one has to cope with the world. Theoretically, word-sensibility is proposed as a hypothetical construct pertaining to affective and conative components. It is about habits, emotions and volition.

Naive Standpoints: In our approach, words have a relational description that coincides with the theory of affordances (Gibson, 1977). To be clear, we are not claiming a linguistic approach to affordances. Our approach to a word-sensibility model is centered on the question of what is commonsense. In the approach, a particular relationship between a coherent sense and conditional sense is called a naive standpoint. Naive standpoints are dynamic responses that respond to the opportunities that the world provides for an organism to exploit. Where the coherent bias can be about how something ought to be viewed, the naive standpoint is only about an organism resonating with the environment. We describe it as a process of direct experience constrained by a organismic system of context. It is important to note that it is not making a judgement, rather, it is dynamically interacted with as a judgement. It resonates with the environment unconditionally, however, it can be used as a conditional resource by the more general coherent bias. Coping and a sense of self identity can become attributes of naive standpoints where it transcends its original hierarchical functions and ascends more globally in a system where it becomes a coherent sense and acquires conditional sub-factors.

Word-sensibility is about orienting abstractions in real experiences. We introduce Dynamical Context: a synergy response reshaped to an event.

Word-topics are nested contextual units called Quadranym units (Q-units):

  • The Q-unit is a particular way to think about words as every word meaning is virtually grounded in some interactional perception with the world.
  • The Q ontology is best understood as a system of contextual units, each unit a conceptual dynamic framework to deal with repurposing specified terms.
Draft - Do Not Quote Or Distribute

Confidential - Not Web Search Enabled