Saved in:
| 主要作者: | |
|---|---|
| 格式: | Recurso digital |
| 語言: | 英语 |
| 出版: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| 主題: | |
| 在線閱讀: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20004042 |
| 標簽: |
添加標簽
沒有標簽, 成為第一個標記此記錄!
|
書本目錄:
- <p>This technical report develops a structural and regulatory account of conflict transformation in cognitive systems. Building on prior work that defined inter-system conflict as the absence of a shared admissible discrepancy structure, introduced inter-system tension and overload memory, formalized asymmetry in conflict burden, distinguished admissibility constraints on conflict processing, and analyzed escalation and locking as trajectory-dependent conflict regimes, the paper asks what it means for such a conflict to be transformed.</p> <p>The report distinguishes conflict transformation from de-escalation, interruption, and immediate resolution. A reduction of current tension does not by itself imply transformation, because conflict-generating conditions may remain unchanged. Conversely, transformation may temporarily increase current tension if previously inadmissible conflict-relevant discrepancies become accessible or if conflict-generating constraints become structurally update-admissible.</p> <p>Conflict transformation is defined as modification of the structural or regulatory conditions that generate, preserve, represent, compensate, update, or lock an inter-system conflict such that the conflict no longer follows the same admissibility-constrained trajectory. On this basis, the paper distinguishes several transformation modes: access transformation, representation transformation, compensability and overload transformation, updating transformation, and locking transformation.</p> <p>The resulting framework shows that transformation does not require immediate disappearance of the conflict condition. A conflict may remain present while becoming more processable, less rigidly represented, more compensable, less overloaded, more update-admissible, or less locked. Transformation is therefore treated as a structural-regulatory change in the trajectory conditions of conflict rather than as practical resolution, mediation, interruption, or simple reduction of current burden.</p>