Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind - UDMM

07/08/2025

Building an Artificial Agent Based on the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM)

Abstract
This paper proposes a novel approach to building artificial agents inspired by the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM). The UDMM frames cognition as a dynamic, predictive interaction between internal generative models and the external world. We explore how this model can be implemented computationally, offering a new architecture for intelligent systems capable of adaptive behavior, emotional simulation, intentionality, and learning. We outline the core architecture, including the perception–prediction loop, the simulation of "virtual attractors," and the representation of time. Emotions are functionally emulated as cognitive responses to prediction errors, and intentionality is framed as a global system constraint. A foundational implementation is available in a public code repository, enabling further development and collaboration.

Key words
UDMM, artificial agent, predictive processing, cognitive architecture, active inference, dynamic model, intentionality, simulated emotions, qualia.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16762043

How We Learn: A Simple Guide to the UDMMThe traditional way of thinking about learning is that it's simply a process of ...
04/08/2025

How We Learn: A Simple Guide to the UDMM

The traditional way of thinking about learning is that it's simply a process of a teacher giving us information, we memorize it, and then we recall it for a test. But this model can't explain why we get bored in class, forget things so quickly, or get good grades without truly understanding anything.
The Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM) offers a deeper, more logical explanation: Learning isn't just about receiving information. It's about building and constantly updating an internal mental model that simulates reality.
1. Your Mind as a Reality Engineer
Imagine your mind is an internal architect. Its job isn't to just store facts; it's to build a detailed, three-dimensional map of the world around you. This map isn't static. It's a dynamic simulation of reality that includes everything from how objects move to how people behave and the fundamental laws of the universe. Every new experience and every piece of information you learn is a new addition or a crucial correction to this map.
* Learning is Synchronization: The goal of this mental architect isn't perfection; it's synchronization. Your internal map needs to be as aligned as possible with the outside world. When your map is accurate and synchronized, you feel a sense of satisfaction and harmony, which is what we call true learning.
* Curiosity is the Compass: Our primary drive to learn isn't fear of punishment or the desire for rewards; it's curiosity. Curiosity is our internal compass that guides us to find the gaps in our mental map. When we encounter information that doesn't fit with what we know, we feel "cognitive tension" or "wonder." This tension is the fuel that pushes us to search for answers and update our map to become synchronized again.
2. Educational Deviation: When the Compass is Hijacked
The problem starts when education stops guiding us towards true synchronization with reality and instead programs our minds to synchronize with false, external goals.
Imagine someone placed a fake compass in front of you. It doesn't point to true north; it points to "high grades," "pleasing the teacher," or "avoiding failure."
* Deviation: This is what we call educational deviation. In this state, your mind stops caring about building an accurate map of the world (true learning) and starts orbiting a narrow, external goal (false learning).
* The Cause: This happens when schools focus primarily on memorisation and tests instead of critical thinking and creativity. The student learns how to succeed in the system, but they don't truly understand the world.
* The Result: This deviation leads to an internal feeling of being lost or bored, even if the student is outwardly successful. This feeling is a sign that your mind hasn't achieved the true synchronisation it craves. Its real compass is still trying to fix the map, but it's forced to follow a fake one.
3. Critical Thinking and Creativity as True Value
In a world changing rapidly because of AI, jobs that rely on "memorising and applying information" are at risk. A machine can do that better and faster.
Therefore, the true value that no AI can compete with you on is your ability to:
* Ask Deep Questions: Ask questions that a machine cannot, which reflect your genuine curiosity and the gaps in your mental map.
* Think Critically: Analyse information and continuously update your mental map without being locked into a single path.
* Be Creative: Generate new and different solutions, which means creating new "possible worlds" on your mental map that no one else can see.
In summary: Effective education, according to the UDMM, is what frees your cognitive compass to return to its natural path—building an accurate, synchronised mental map of the world—rather than spinning in a false orbit around external goals. This is the only path to real learning that lasts and to creativity that is truly unmatched.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16737021

23/07/2025

The Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM): A Foundational Manifesto for Cognition, Emotion, and Culture

This manifesto explores a fundamental shift in cognitive theory—from passive prediction to active creation—within the framework of the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM). It examines the mechanisms by which conscious agents impose their internal expectations onto reality through language, habits, and social systems, eventually generating a “reality aligned with imagination.” The article distinguishes between passive prediction and creative expectation, while addressing the dangers of "creative deviation," such as cognitive tyranny or escapism. It concludes by outlining the core conditions for establishing a conscious, creative cognitive model, where the mind is seen not merely as a mirror of the world, but as a continuous workshop of becoming and transformation.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16381124

16/07/2025

A New Understanding of Mind Boundaries: A Perspective from the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM)
Atbara, Sudan – July 16, 2025 – In a significant new research contribution offering an innovative perspective on the human mind, a paper titled "Mind Boundaries in the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM): From Predictive Resistance to Cognitive Possibility" has been published. This paper introduces a revolutionary view of "mind boundaries," redefining them not as static obstacles, but as dynamic and crucial elements in the process of building awareness and expanding cognitive capabilities.
Traditional psychological schools of thought have often approached the concept of boundaries in various contexts, typically focusing on their role as protective barriers or defensive mechanisms. Whether these were psychological boundaries defining the self's relationship with others, psychoanalytic mechanisms like repression and denial for maintaining psychic integrity, or cognitive limits on memory and attention, the prevailing perception linked them to restriction or control.
In stark contrast, the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM) presents a fundamentally different vision. Within this theoretical framework, boundaries are understood as "moments of cognitive resistance" that emerge when the mind's internal model fails in its predictions or encounters inconsistencies it cannot easily resolve. Far from being negative, these moments are seen as pivotal points that compel the mind to re-evaluate and modify its predictive models of reality. They instigate a process of internal restructuring, contributing to cognitive growth and the emergence of higher levels of awareness.
The paper clarifies that awareness of these boundaries is an advanced cognitive function. When the cognitive system recognizes its predictive shortcomings, it enters a cycle of adaptation and reorganization. This not only allows it to resolve existing inconsistencies but also to generate new, more comprehensive internal representations, thereby opening the door to cognitive possibilities previously inaccessible.
Boundaries in UDMM: Types and Interactions
The paper categorizes boundaries within UDMM into five primary types, emphasizing their complex interactions:
* Biological Boundaries: These include innate physical limitations such as sensory capacities (what we can see or hear), memory capacity, physical strength, and the physical limits of the body itself. These fundamental constraints, though inherent, play a role in compelling the mind to find innovative ways to adapt or transcend.
* Cognitive/Predictive Boundaries: Related to the model's failure to produce accurate predictions or understand complex concepts.
* Symbolic/Social Boundaries: Arising from interaction with cultural norms, social standards, and symbolic interpretations.
* Emotional Boundaries: Pertaining to threats to emotional stability or social connectedness.
* Temporal Boundaries: Connected to the perception of time, missed opportunities, or the pressure of deadlines.
The paper highlights that these boundary types do not operate in isolation but interact within a dynamic network that drives the mental model toward comprehensive and integrated restructuring. This interaction contributes to forming what is referred to as the system's "total intention."
Boundaries as Channels for Cognitive Expansion
The paper proposes that boundaries serve as "gateways" to awareness and the expansion of possibilities. Mechanisms like neural plasticity, continuous learning, and the mind's capacity for simulation and imagination enable it to internally test transcending these boundaries, accelerating the learning process and reducing the need for direct real-world failure. Even "boredom," often viewed negatively, is re-defined in UDMM as a dynamic boundary indicating a state of "predictive flatness," prompting the cognitive system to seek new information or challenges that restore the dynamic tension crucial for growth.
By introducing this novel perspective, the paper contributes to a deeper understanding of the mechanisms of learning, creativity, and adaptation in the human mind. It opens new avenues for research in various fields of psychology, neuroscience, and even artificial intelligence, where it could inspire the design of intelligent systems capable of self-evolution by recognizing and adapting to their own "boundaries," much like the human mind.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15980735

🧠 What Is Intention, Really?A Simple Introduction to the Three Layers of Intent in the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind...
11/07/2025

🧠 What Is Intention, Really?

A Simple Introduction to the Three Layers of Intent in the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM)

💡 First: What Is the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM)?

In a world full of scattered theories about how the mind works — some focusing on thought, others on emotion or behavior — the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM) comes in as a holistic framework that brings it all together.

In simple terms, UDMM sees the mind as a living, predictive system that constantly simulates the world in order to reduce the gap between what it expects and what it actually experiences.

It doesn't work like a camera that passively records, but more like a smart director who imagines the scene first, then tests it and updates their script in real-time.
It involves the body, emotion, language, and time — all working together to form a constantly evolving inner model of reality.

🎯 What Is “Intent” in This Model?

In UDMM, intent is not just a fleeting wish or conscious goal. It is:

The direction the mind moves toward as it explores or constructs a possible world.

The driving force that shapes how the internal model evolves and acts.

A key mechanism for choosing between possible actions, meanings, and futures.

But intent is not a single thing — it exists in three layered forms, all interacting.

🧩 The Three Layers of Intent

1. Structural Intent

> This is the deepest layer — instinctive, pre-linguistic, and mostly unconscious.

It's the mind’s basic drive to make sense of the world, seek coherence, survive, and reduce uncertainty.

It appears early in life, even in animals, and guides attention and learning without being felt directly.

For example: the unease you feel when something “doesn’t add up,” or the urge to complete a pattern.

🎯 This is the core attractor — the foundation of all intent.

2. Phenomenal Intent

> This is your subjective, lived version of intent.

It forms through experience, emotions, memory, personal values.

“I want to change,” “I need to understand,” “I aim for peace.”

It’s dynamic, shaped by relationships, trauma, goals, and reflection.

🎯 This is the conscious, narrative layer — the one we can talk about and write down.

3. Symbolic Intent

> This is the intent shaped by social, cultural, religious, and political systems.

Like the belief that “success means having a high-status job.”

Or that “happiness lies in obedience” (from religion or tradition).

Or that “a man must never show weakness.”

These forms of intent are not inherently bad — they help guide behavior — but they can become coercive attractors (W_coerced) if blindly internalized, leading to inner conflict or alienation.

🎯 This is the externalized, norm-driven layer — inherited, not always chosen.

🔄 How Do These Layers Interact?

Think of the mind as a moving system guided by:

Structural intent = internal gravity pulling toward meaning and coherence.

Phenomenal intent = the personal path, shaped by memory and emotion.

Symbolic intent = the road signs and rules imposed by society.

🌀 When they’re in balance, the person feels aligned, authentic, and capable of growth.
💥 When symbolic intent dominates, the self may feel lost, anxious, or disconnected from inner truth.

📌 In Summary:

In UDMM, intent is not just a goal — it is a dynamic structure made up of three interwoven layers:

1. Structural (deep, embodied, unconscious)

2. Phenomenal (personal, emotional, evolving)

3. Symbolic (social, inherited, potentially coercive)

Understanding these layers can help us better understand ourselves, reclaim agency, and reduce the hidden tensions that shape our thoughts and behaviors.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15858182

Symbolic Intent in UDMM: How Intentions Are Formed from the OutsideWe’ve previously clarified that the core assumption o...
03/07/2025

Symbolic Intent in UDMM: How Intentions Are Formed from the Outside

We’ve previously clarified that the core assumption of the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM) is that the mind actively constructs an internal simulation of the world and continuously tries to synchronize it—making the inner model match the external world as closely as possible.

Now, imagine that your mind isn’t just a system that makes decisions on its own. It's also a dynamic entity, deeply influenced by everything around it: society, culture, religion, and dominant ideologies. This external influence is what we refer to in UDMM as Symbolic Intent.

In simple terms, symbolic intent refers to the ready-made intentions imposed on you by your social and cultural environment—values, goals, behavioral norms—all preprogrammed into the structure of society. It's called symbolic because it is based on shared social symbols and representations, rather than on your own original lived experience.

How Symbolic Intent Operates within UDMM

1. External Origins:

Society defines success (e.g., as a prestigious job).

Culture outlines happiness (e.g., through marriage or wealth).

Religion frames belonging and identity.

Institutions inject values like obsession with grades or social status.

2. Internal Assimilation:
Symbolic intent isn’t imposed overtly. It seeps into your inner world gradually, until it becomes embedded in your mental model—appearing as if it originates from within.

3. Predictive Scaffolds:
Within the logic of UDMM, this type of intent can serve a useful predictive function. It acts as a "predictive scaffold" that helps you anticipate others’ behavior and navigate the social world more efficiently. Shared symbolic values reduce informational tension and provide functional stability within the system.

Where’s the Risk? The Coerced Attractor

The danger arises when symbolic intent is internalized without critical reflection, and without aligning it with your deeper motivational structures—what UDMM refers to as structural intent and phenomenological intent. In such cases, symbolic intent can turn into a coerced attractor:

A false goal your mind is forced to orbit.

It reshapes your internal model to conform to external standards—even if they don't bring true internal fulfillment.

Your mind becomes pulled toward a magnet that isn’t truly yours.

Consequences:

Deviation from Authentic Intent:
You lose your internal compass and start chasing goals that don’t belong to you—disrupting the synchronization between your internal model and the real world.

Closure of Possible Worlds:
Your ability to imagine or generate alternative actions and realities shuts down. You begin repeating the same societal patterns with no innovation.

Hidden Internal Tension:
Even if you achieve “success” on the outside (good grades, job, status), you may feel empty, alienated, or anxious. That’s because the coerced attractor doesn’t align with your virtual attractor, and rather than reducing the divergence between your model and reality (KL Divergence), it increases it.

In Summary:

Symbolic intent is an externally derived framework of goals and values. It can be predictively helpful, but also dangerously coercive if left unexamined. The challenge in UDMM is to distinguish, decode, and critically review symbolic intent—so it doesn't become the master while you remain the servant.

Identity Versus Forgetting: Applying the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM) to the Dual-Store Generative Consolidation...
29/06/2025

Identity Versus Forgetting: Applying the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM) to the Dual-Store Generative Consolidation Hypothesis for LLMs
Creators
aidaros, mohamed (Researcher)
ORCID icon

Abstract

This paper proposes an integrative framework combining the Unified Dynamic Model of Mind (UDMM) with the Dual-Store Generative Consolidation (DSGC) hypothesis to address a central limitation in current large language models (LLMs): their inability to maintain a stable cognitive identity due to the absence of persistent memory. We argue that memory is not merely a storage mechanism but a dynamic temporal condition essential for continuity, self-modeling, and reducing informational tension across interactions. The proposed hybrid framework aligns the episodic-semantic memory architecture of DSGC with UDMM’s predictive processing and virtual attractor dynamics. This fusion supports identity persistence, narrative continuity, and scalable learning across time. We formalize this hybrid architecture through a mathematical model that operationalizes informational tension as a KL-divergence objective function, guided by memory retrieval and a reinforcement learning (RL)-based consolidation policy. We frame this model as a resolution to the informational conflicts: !UDMM_CONFLICT (Autonomy Suppressed) and !SIM_REALITY_CONFLICT (World-model Drift), which manifest when stateless LLMs fail to integrate past interactions into their evolving self-models. We also outline implementation pathways and future empirical testing, positioning this integration as foundational for creating lifelong artificial minds.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15766817

Human Needs Through the Lens of the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM)AbstractThis paper explores human needs from...
22/06/2025

Human Needs Through the Lens of the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM)

Abstract
This paper explores human needs from the perspective of the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM). Unlike traditional theories that treat needs as static hierarchies or innate drives, UDMM redefines them as manifestations of informational tension—temporary divergences between an agent's internal predictive model and incoming sensory inputs from the external world. We trace the evolutionary progression of this model from embodied biological responses to complex internal simulations of reality, culminating in the concept of a "virtual attractor" (W\_{\\text{ideal}}), which dynamically guides the system toward a state of maximum alignment, meaning, and satisfaction. Within this framework, needs become signals for restoring synchrony, allowing a unified account of physiological, cognitive, emotional, and existential needs. This paper offers a reconceptualization of motivational systems and introduces a dynamic classification of needs with applications in therapy, education, and user-centered design.
1. Introduction
Within the UDMM framework, human needs are not static lists or isolated instinctual drives. Rather, they are understood as informational tensions—deviations from a virtual attractor that governs the alignment between the internal predictive model of the mind and its ever-changing sensory inputs. This reconceptualization frames every need as a momentary disruption in the flow of synchrony between the modeled world and its real counterpart, interpreted through the senses.
2. From Embodied Reflex to Predictive Simulation
To ground our understanding of human needs within the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM), it's essential to first review the evolutionary and functional roots of this model. At its core, UDMM posits that the mind is not a passive information processor but a dynamic, active entity that originated as a simple biological embodiment, gradually evolving into a complex system capable of effectively simulating and synchronizing with reality.
We can trace the evolutionary trajectory of this model through the following stages:
2.1. Primitive Embodiment and Sensory Reactivity
At its most basic level, the mind originated as a biologically embodied system responding directly to environmental stimuli. These responses were primitive and instinctual, geared towards maintaining internal biological equilibrium for survival. In this early stage, "needs" directly translated into acute physiological deviations (such as hunger or pain) requiring immediate action to restore biological balance. There was no "model" in the complex cognitive sense, but merely conditioned linkages between sensory inputs and motor outputs.
2.2. Emergence of Prediction as a Survival Mechanism Driven by Sensory Reality
As organisms and environments grew more complex, mere reactive responses became insufficient. The need for predicting the future emerged to avoid dangers and seize opportunities. Here, the mind began developing basic internal models of reality. It no longer just responded to "what is," but evolved to include the anticipation of "what will be." These predictions were not arbitrary; they relied fundamentally on continuous inputs from the external world via the senses. This early development in predictive capacity was crucial; instead of merely reacting to hunger, the organism began to anticipate when it would be hungry and take proactive measures based on sensory cues from its internal and external environment. Here, a "need" transforms from a mere sensory signal into a tension resulting from a failure in prediction or a divergence from sensory-backed expectations related to survival.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15715202

Hijacking the Compass: A Dynamical Systems Model of Addiction based on the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM)Creat...
20/06/2025

Hijacking the Compass: A Dynamical Systems Model of Addiction based on the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM)
Creators
aidaros, mohamed
ORCID icon
Description
Abstract

Contemporary models of addiction often struggle to explain compulsive and persistent behaviors that transcend the mere pursuit of reward, leading to a radical reshaping of an individual's motivations and values. In this paper, we introduce a novel computational framework based on the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM), which posits that the mind operates as a proactive inference system continuously aligning itself with a virtual internal compass, represented by an ideal probabilistic attractor (W_{ideal}). We conceptualize addiction as a "hijacking" of this attractor: the addictive substance or behavior, through hierarchical Bayesian learning and stochastic differential equations, updates the internal attractor. This leads to a migration of the attractor from a healthy, balanced center to a compulsive one that dominates behavioral dynamics. This transition explains phenomena such as craving and relapse as necessary consequences of a dynamical bifurcation in the state space. The discussion explores the potential for therapeutic interventions aimed at re-learning the healthy attractor and reshaping the internal landscape of values.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15695294

Toward a Mathematical Formulation of the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM): Active Inference Guided by a Virtual ...
18/06/2025

Toward a Mathematical Formulation of the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM): Active Inference Guided by a Virtual Attractor

Author Note

The original conceptual framework of the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM) was developed by the author. The mathematical formulation and computational concepts proposed in this paper were developed in inferential collaboration with the Gemini Large Language Model (Google), used as a tool to support the initial formulation of the mathematical and technical framework.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Mohamed Ahmed Aidaros, Atbara, Sudan. [midroos@gmail.com].

Abstract

Current computational neuroscience models often struggle to account for the continuous, value-oriented human drive that is not satisfied by achieving discrete goals. This paper introduces a new conceptual framework, the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM), which posits the mind as an inferential system proactively shaping its environment. Central to UDMM is the concept of a "saturated world," reconceptualized here not as an achievable goal-state but as a virtual attractor—a hypothetical probabilistic distribution that cannot be fully attained, yet serves as a consistent compass guiding system behavior. We propose an initial mathematical formulation grounded in the Free Energy Principle and Active Inference (Friston, 2010), where the agent does not simply minimize prediction error to reach a stable state. Instead, it continuously minimizes the Kullback-Leibler (KL) Divergence between its expected future state distribution and the ideal distribution representing the saturated world. This approach produces behavior resembling a stable orbit around higher values. The paper outlines a roadmap for developing computational models based on this principle and opens new avenues for modeling meaning, purpose, and mental disorders as dysfunctions in the dynamic relationship with this virtual attractor.
Keywords: Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM), Active Inference, Free Energy Principle, Control Theory, Computational Neuroscience, Dynamical Systems Theory, Values
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15685254

Author NoteThe original conceptual framework of the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM) was developed by the author...
17/06/2025

Author Note
The original conceptual framework of the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM) was developed by the author. The mathematical formulation and computational concepts proposed in this paper were developed in inferential collaboration with the Gemini Large Language Model (Google), used as a tool to support the initial formulation of the mathematical and technical framework.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Mohamed Ahmed Aidaros, Atbara, Sudan. [midroos@gmail.com].
Abstract
Current computational neuroscience models often struggle to account for the continuous, value-oriented human drive that is not satisfied by achieving discrete goals. This paper introduces a new conceptual framework, the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM), which posits the mind as an inferential system proactively shaping its environment. Central to UDMM is the concept of a "saturated world," reconceptualized here not as an achievable goal-state but as a virtual attractor—a hypothetical probabilistic distribution that cannot be fully attained, yet serves as a consistent compass guiding system behavior. We propose an initial mathematical formulation grounded in the Free Energy Principle and Active Inference (Friston, 2010), where the agent does not simply minimize prediction error to reach a stable state. Instead, it continuously minimizes the Kullback-Leibler (KL) Divergence between its expected future state distribution and the ideal distribution representing the saturated world. This approach produces behavior resembling a stable orbit around higher values. The paper outlines a roadmap for developing computational models based on this principle and opens new avenues for modeling meaning, purpose, and mental disorders as dysfunctions in the dynamic relationship with this virtual attractor.
Keywords: Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM), Active Inference, Free Energy Principle, Control Theory, Computational Neuroscience, Dynamical Systems Theory, Values

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15685254

15/06/2025

🧠📄 New Publication: Cognitive Specialization and Integration in UDMM

I’m pleased to share my latest theoretical paper:
"Specialization and Cognitive Integration in the Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind (UDMM)"
📥 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15665108

This work presents a major update to the UDMM framework, proposing that the mind is composed of specialized cognitive units (like the eye or ear), each containing a miniature version of the full UDMM. These units simulate reality from their own sensory perspective, generating localized models and partial intentions.

🧩 These specialized simulations are then dynamically integrated at a higher level, forming a unified, moment-to-moment conscious experience.
The paper explores this hierarchical modular structure, drawing connections with:

Predictive Processing & Global Workspace Theory

Neural Binding and the LIDA cognitive architecture

Embodied and distributed cognition

🔍 Potential implications include:

Explaining partial or localized awareness (e.g., in sensory loss)

Modeling resilient cognitive systems

Inspiring AI designs based on interacting specialized models rather than centralized logic

This update reframes UDMM as a multi-layered system of synchronized models, where consciousness emerges from modular integration. I welcome feedback, collaboration, and critique!

Address

Atbara

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind - UDMM posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to Unified Dynamic Model of the Mind - UDMM:

Share

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn
Share on Pinterest Share on Reddit Share via Email
Share on WhatsApp Share on Instagram Share on Telegram

Category