Abstract Computability on uncountable sets has no standard formalization, unlike that on countable sets, which is given by Turing machines. Some of the approaches to define computability in these sets rely on order-theoretic structures to translate such notions from Turing machines to uncountable spaces. Since these machines are used as a baseline for computability in these approaches, countability restrictions on the ordered structures are fundamental. Here, we show several relations between the usual countability restrictions in order-theoretic theories of computability and some more common order-theoretic countability constraints, like order density properties and functional characterizations of the order structure in terms of multi-utilities. As a result, we show how computability can be introduced in some order structures via countability order density and multi-utility constraints.

Complex information processing systems that are capable of a wide variety of tasks, such as the human brain, are composed of specialized units that collaborate and communicate with each other. An important property of such information processing networks is locality: there is no single global unit controlling the modules, but information is exchanged locally. Here, we consider a decision-theoretic approach to study networks of bounded rational decision makers that are allowed to specialize and communicate with each other. In contrast to previous work that has focused on feedforward communication between decision-making agents, we consider cyclical information processing paths allowing for back-and-forth communication. We adapt message-passing algorithms to suit this purpose, essentially allowing for local information flow between units and thus enabling circular dependency structures. We provide examples that show how repeated communication can increase performance given that each unit's information processing capability is limited and that decision-making systems with too few or too many connections and feedback loops achieve suboptimal utility.

The concept of free energy has its origins in 19th century thermodynamics, but has recently found its way into the behavioral and neural sciences, where it has been promoted for its wide applicability and has even been suggested as a fundamental principle of understanding intelligent behavior and brain function. We argue that there are essentially two different notions of free energy in current models of intelligent agency, that can both be considered as applications of Bayesian inference to the problem of action selection: one that appears when trading off accuracy and uncertainty based on a general maximum entropy principle, and one that formulates action selection in terms of minimizing an error measure that quantifies deviations of beliefs and policies from given reference models. The first approach provides a normative rule for action selection in the face of model uncertainty or when information processing capabilities are limited. The second approach directly aims to formulate the action selection problem as an inference problem in the context of Bayesian brain theories, also known as Active Inference in the literature. We elucidate the main ideas and discuss critical technical and conceptual issues revolving around these two notions of free energy that both claim to apply at all levels of decision-making, from the high-level deliberation of reasoning down to the low-level information processing of perception.

Specialization and hierarchical organization are important features of efficient collaboration in economical, artificial, and biological systems. Here, we investigate the hypothesis that both features can be explained by the fact that each entity of such a system is limited in a certain way. We propose an information-theoretic approach based on a free energy principle in order to computationally analyze systems of bounded rational agents that deal with such limitations optimally. We find that specialization allows a focus on fewer tasks, thus leading to a more efficient execution, but in turn, it requires coordination in hierarchical structures of specialized experts and coordinating units. Our results suggest that hierarchical architectures of specialized units at lower levels that are coordinated by units at higher levels are optimal, given that each unit's information-processing capability is limited and conforms to constraints on complexity costs.