Evolution, Future of AI, and Singularity

Zeki Doruk Erden

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 260 references

Evolution, Future of AI, and Singularity

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that design principles from evolutionary developmental biology can give AI continual learning, comprehensible structure, and a grounded path to a technological singularity.

desk verdict Original Evo-Devo-to-AI synthesis that is clearly written and genuinely novel, but the central scalability and continual-learning claims rest on unsupported assertions and unsummarized self-citations. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.02876 v1 pith:MLKPZHUF submitted 2025-06-18 cs.OH cs.NEnlin.AO

Zeki Doruk Erden This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.OHcs.NEnlin.AO

keywords continuallearningcatastrophicforgettingevolutionarydevelopmentalbiologyevo-devostructuredrepresentationslocalvariationandselectiontechnologicalsingularityfreeenergyprinciple

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that the two deepest failings of current AI—that learning something new destroys what was already known, and that the learned internal representation is an incomprehensible black box—are not incidental bugs but consequences of the dominant design: flat, overparameterized neural networks optimized as statistical function approximators. The author's proposed remedy comes from Evolutionary Developmental Biology, the same field that corrected the Modern Synthesis in biology by showing that conserved core processes, higher-level regulatory control, and local variation-with-selection generate the modular, hierarchical, reusable structures seen in organisms. Translated into design principles for AI, these mechanisms promise systems that grow by adding and refining encapsulated components, so old knowledge survives new learning and the resulting structure is inspectable and modifiable. The paper further claims that such systems would be able to integrate with planning and information-seeking, enter a recursive improvement cycle, and thereby make the technological singularity a tangible near-future prospect rather than speculation.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the exploratory process: a general class of biological mechanisms in which surplus variants of a substructure are generated locally and then pruned or retained by a selective signal—clonal selection in immunity, synaptic and axonal overproduction followed by pruning in the developing brain. The paper abstracts three design principles from this: encapsulation of core processes (stable, conserved, weakly linked building blocks), higher-level regulatory processes that deploy those cores without altering their internals, and growth by local variation and selection that complexifies a model only where needed. These principles are what distinguish the proposed paradigm from a single overparameterized network trained by gradient descent; they are the machinery that is supposed to deliver both continual learning and comprehensibility.

What would settle it

Train one of the paper's cited systems (for example the agent in [212]) on two sequential tasks from different domains and measure performance on the first task after the second is learned; if accuracy on the first task falls materially, or if the system requires replay or task-boundary signals to avoid that fall, the central claim of continual learning without destructive adaptation is refuted. A second check: attempt to manually edit or remove one learned module and confirm the rest of the model's behavior is unchanged, which would verify the claimed modularity.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central claim is that the same three design principles that Evolutionary Developmental Biology used to extend the Modern Synthesis—encapsulation of conserved core processes, higher-level regulatory control over those processes, and growth through local variation and selection—can overcome the foundational limitations of contemporary machine learning. Current networks fail at continual learning because gradient descent exerts uniform selective pressure over a fixed pool of weights: it can amplify useful variation but cannot generate new variation locally, exactly where it is needed, without disturbing existing patterns. The paper maintains that a learning system built on the evo-devo principles acquires a modular, hierarchical, multi-level representation whose components are comprehensible and reusable, so that new tasks can be handled by regulating or composing existing processes instead of overwriting them. If such systems are realized, the paper concludes, they can integrate deliberative planning and active information seeking with learned models and drive a recursive improvement loop—better models, better behavior, better knowledge acquisition—whose accelerating trajectory is what the technological singularity actually means.

Load-bearing premise

The argument stands on the premise that the three evo-devo principles can be implemented in artificial learning systems at scale—that local variation can be generated on demand without disrupting existing knowledge and that the resulting structured representations remain expressive enough to learn complex functions—a premise the paper asserts and supports mainly by pointing to its own earlier works without summarizing their results.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Continual learning ceases to be an open problem: an agent can learn tasks in any order and environment, with no replay buffer and no assumption of known task boundaries.
Learned models become inspectable and modifiable like engineered systems, so a designer could retarget or constrain behavior by altering a module rather than retraining the whole network.
Classical symbolic capabilities—planning, constraint satisfaction, explicit uncertainty—can be attached to learned representations, giving agents goal-directed deliberation instead of reward-driven trial and error.
An AI with these properties can enter a recursive improvement cycle (better environment model → better behavior → better knowledge acquisition → better model), which the paper identifies as the mechanism behind a technological singularity.
Whether an accelerating AI operates under human control or outside it becomes a design choice, because structured representations allow targeted human modification.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The paper's strongest untested implication is that expressivity need not be sacrificed: local, on-demand complexification could in principle match or exceed the approximation power of overparameterized networks, but that claim is not derived here and depends on details of the cited early systems that the paper does not summarize.
If the evo-devo analogy is predictive, a measurable signature of the new paradigm would be that continual-learning benchmarks can be solved without any replay mechanism, and that the learned components transfer to unseen tasks in a compositional way.
The free-energy argument, taken to its logical end, implies that intelligence is not a special human or neural property but the generic behavior of any self-maintaining system that updates its model, acts pragmatically, and seeks information—so the paper's real claim is broader than AI design.
The most natural test bed is not language modeling but embodied agents: a household robot that must accumulate skills over a lifetime would be the domain where the paradigm's promises of no forgetting, inspectable structure, and integration with planning can be decisively demonstrated.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper you should know about: it's a conceptual position paper that translates Evolutionary Developmental Biology principles into AI design principles to overcome catastrophic forgetting and black-box opacity, then argues this makes a technological singularity a near-term prospect. The synthesis is original and the writing is clear, but the load-bearing evidence is deferred to the author's own earlier papers, which are not summarized here.

What's genuinely new: the specific mapping of encapsulation, higher-level regulatory control, and local variation-selection onto AI system design, and the claim that these address a common root cause of both destructive forgetting and incomprehensibility. I haven't seen that framing in the literature. The paper also gives a fair, readable account of current ML limitations and the parallels with the Modern Synthesis in evolution.

The soft spot is proportionate but real: the central constructive claim—that these principles can be implemented at scale and will yield smaller, comprehensible, continually-learning models—is asserted, not demonstrated. The complexification-by-need bullet in Section V.A states that the required complexity 'would be smaller than that of a typical neural network trained by SGD,' but no bound, benchmark, or even a sketch of an argument is given. The only cited demonstrations are [210–213], the author's own works, and their results are not summarized. That puts a substantial circularity burden on the reader. The singularity argument in Section VI inherits these assumptions, so its force is exactly the force of the unshown scalability claims.

To be fair, the paper explicitly flags the speculative evolution-intelligence equivalence in Section IV as beyond its scope, so that part is honest. The sharper issue is the leap from 'plausible analogy' in Section V to 'a very tangible possibility for the near future' in Section VI.B, without any new evidence in between.

Bottom line: this deserves a serious referee—the synthesis is original and the paper is well-structured and might provoke useful discussion. But I would not accept it as-is. It needs either the experimental results from the cited works included or a substantial tempering of the claims. Send it to peer review with a request for major revision.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a conceptual argument that contemporary AI, centered on overparameterized neural networks trained by gradient descent, suffers from two linked limitations: destructive adaptation (the loss of existing knowledge when learning new tasks) and the incomprehensibility/non-decomposability of learned representations. Drawing a parallel between these limitations and the explanatory gaps of the 20th-century Modern Synthesis in evolutionary biology, the author proposes that principles from Evolutionary Developmental Biology—encapsulation of core processes, higher-level regulatory control, and local variation-with-selection—can be translated into AI design principles. The paper further argues that such a paradigm would enable continual learning, produce human-comprehensible structured models, integrate with deliberative processes such as planning, and thereby ground the technological singularity as a tangible near-future possibility. The manuscript is an essay or position paper; it contains no new formal theorems, empirical experiments, or detailed algorithmic proposals, and it refers to the author's own earlier works [210-213] for demonstrations of the proposed principles.

Significance. If the proposed design principles were successfully realized, the contribution would be significant: the analogy between the Modern Synthesis and current machine learning is thought-provoking and identifies real, well-documented limitations such as catastrophic forgetting and black-box representations. The paper is honest about the speculative status of Section IV, explicitly acknowledging that parts of its argument need more formal analysis. It also provides a wide-ranging bibliography and a falsifiable proposal: the cited works [210-213] are concrete attempts that either do or do not demonstrate the promised capabilities. However, as written, the central constructive claim is not supported by evidence contained in the manuscript, and the singularity conclusion is conditional on that unverified claim. The paper's value at present is as a synthesis and a research manifesto rather than a validated technical contribution.

major comments (4)

[Section V.A, 'Growth and Local Variation & Selection'] The claim that 'the required complexity for a given task, with proper minimal-growth or complexification methods, would be smaller than that of a typical neural network trained by SGD' is asserted without a formal bound, benchmark, or experimental summary. The only cited support is the author's earlier works [210-213], whose protocols and results are not described in the manuscript, so a reader cannot assess whether the demonstrated cases generalize beyond toy settings. This scalability claim is load-bearing because Section VI.B's argument for recursive improvement and singularity inherits it.
[Section V.A, 'Encapsulation and Core Processes' and 'Higher-Level Regulatory Processes'] The three design principles are stated at an informal level with no algorithmic or formal specification. The paper does not define encapsulation, regulatory control, or local variation in computational terms, nor does it argue why a system built on these principles would retain the representational capacity of overparameterized neural networks on complex real-world tasks. Without such a specification, the central assertion that these principles 'can overcome the limitations of AI' is not yet assessable.
[Section VI.B, five-step recursive improvement cycle] Each step of the proposed recursive improvement cycle presupposes capabilities—continual learning without destructive adaptation, structured representations, deliberation, active information seeking—that Section V.A promises but does not establish. The singularity conclusion is therefore conditional on the unproven central premise; the paper should either provide evidence for that premise or explicitly frame the singularity argument as a conditional scenario rather than as a 'very tangible possibility for the near future.'
[Sections V.A and V.B] The paper relies heavily on the author's own prior works [210-213] as demonstrations of the proposed paradigm, but it does not summarize their scope, evaluation tasks, or quantitative results. These citations appear at precisely the points where the reader needs evidence, making the central argument substantially a reference to work elsewhere rather than a self-contained presentation.

minor comments (5)

[Section V.B, heading] The heading 'Enabling and faciliation of high-level processes' contains a typo: 'faciliation' should be 'facilitation'.
[Section VI.B] The phrase 'structrured representation' should be corrected to 'structured representation'.
[Footnote 14] The placeholders '[hawkins2016neurons, antic2018embedded]' are not resolved to entries in the reference list; the intended references should be added.
[Reference [63]] The entry is listed as 'Kirschner Marc' with an incomplete author name; the full citation (Kirschner and Gerhart) would be more useful to readers.
[Introduction and references] Several claims rely on non-archival web sources (e.g., [1], [3], [25]); replacing these with peer-reviewed references where possible would strengthen the paper.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the paper's argument is analogical and its definitional moves are explicit; self-citations and unsupported scalability claims are evidentiary concerns rather than circular reductions.

full rationale

This is a conceptual/position paper, not an empirical derivation with fitted parameters. The central argument is an analogy: limitations of the Modern Synthesis in evolutionary biology are parallel to limitations of contemporary machine learning, and principles from Evolutionary Developmental Biology (encapsulation, regulatory control, local variation-and-selection) are proposed as design guidelines for AI. No equation is fitted to data and then renamed as a prediction; no quantity is defined in terms of the very conclusion it is supposed to support. The free-energy discussion in Section IV.A explicitly stipulates a 'plausible foundational definition of intelligence' in terms of the three FEP drives, and the later suggestion that evolution is intelligent transparently follows from that stipulated definition together with an argument that the biosphere reduces entropy. This is a flagged interpretive framing, not a hidden circular derivation. The paper's constructive claims in Section V.A ('The same design principles can overcome the limitations of AI...') are asserted as a design thesis and supported by references to the author's own earlier works [210-213], and the scalability assertion that complexification-by-need yields smaller models than SGD-trained networks is unproved. These are real evidentiary and rigor weaknesses, but they are not cases where the claimed result reduces by construction to its inputs. The cited works are external demonstrations, not internal assumptions that make the conclusion equivalent to the premise. Therefore the paper shows no significant circularity under the stated criteria.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claims rest on several unproven background assumptions: the aptness of the Modern Synthesis-to-ML analogy, the transferability of EDB principles to engineered systems, and the validity of the free energy principle as a theory of intelligence. The author's own prior works are the only cited demonstrations, making them a key unfunded premise.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The limitations of contemporary ML are fundamental and analogous to the limitations of the Modern Synthesis.
The paper asserts that destructive adaptation and incomprehensibility stem from the lack of structured representation and local variation, but does not prove this causal link.
domain assumption The principles of EDB, such as conserved core processes and local variation-selection, can be abstractly transferred to artificial learning systems.
The transfer is based on analogy, not a formal isomorphism.
domain assumption The free energy principle provides a valid foundation for defining intelligence and for concluding that evolution is intelligent.
Section IV relies on the FEP literature, which is itself a contested framework; the paper acknowledges this is speculative.
ad hoc to paper The author's prior works [210-213] demonstrate the promised capabilities.
These works are cited as evidence but their results are not included in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Evolution, Future of AI, and Singularity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MLKPZHUF

@misc{pith2026250702876,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Evolution, Future of AI, and Singularity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MLKPZHUF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.02876}
}

read the original abstract

This article critically examines the foundational principles of contemporary AI methods, exploring the limitations that hinder its potential. We draw parallels between the modern AI landscape and the 20th-century Modern Synthesis in evolutionary biology, and highlight how advancements in evolutionary theory that augmented the Modern Synthesis, particularly those of Evolutionary Developmental Biology, offer insights that can inform a new design paradigm for AI. By synthesizing findings across AI and evolutionary theory, we propose a pathway to overcome existing limitations, enabling AI to achieve its aspirational goals. We also examine how this perspective transforms the idea of an AI-driven technological singularity from speculative futurism into a grounded prospect.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.02876 by the authors.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

260 extracted references · 57 canonical work pages

[1]

https : / / www

Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Manufacturing Mar- ket Report By 2034 — precedenceresearch.com . https : / / www . precedenceresearch . com / artificial - intelligence - in - manufacturing-market. [Accessed 20-02-2025]

2025
[2]

AI adoption in America: Who, what, and where

Kristina McElheran, J Frank Li, Erik Brynjolfsson, Zachary Kroff, Emin Dinlersoz, Lucia Foster, and Niko- las Zolas. “AI adoption in America: Who, what, and where”. In: Journal of Economics & Management Strat- egy 33.2 (2024), pp. 375–415

2024
[3]

https : / / springsapps

Large Language Model Statistics And Numbers (2025) - Springs — springsapps.com . https : / / springsapps . com / knowledge / large - language - model - statistics - and - numbers-2024. [Accessed 20-02-2025]

2025
[4]

https : / / aiindex

AI Index Report 2024 Artificial Intelligence Index — aiindex.stanford.edu . https : / / aiindex . stanford.edu/report/. [Accessed 20-02-2025]

2024
[5]

The structure of scientific revolutions

Thomas S Kuhn. The structure of scientific revolutions. V ol. 962. University of Chicago press Chicago, 1997

1997
[6]

Deep learning

Yoshua Bengio, Ian Goodfellow, and Aaron Courville. Deep learning . V ol. 1. MIT press Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017

2017
[7]

An introduction to neural networks

Kevin Gurney. An introduction to neural networks . CRC press, 2018

2018
[8]

Con- nectionism, Complexity, and Living Systems: a compar- ison of Artificial and Biological Neural Networks

Krishna Katyal, Jesse Parent, and Bradly Alicea. Con- nectionism, Complexity, and Living Systems: a compar- ison of Artificial and Biological Neural Networks. 2021. arXiv: 2103 . 15553 [cs.NE]. URL: https : / / arxiv.org/abs/2103.15553

arXiv 2021

Show all 260 references

[9]

Avoiding catastrophe: Active dendrites enable multi- task learning in dynamic environments

Abhiram Iyer, Karan Grewal, Akash Velu, Lucas Oliveira Souza, Jeremy Forest, and Subutai Ahmad. “Avoiding catastrophe: Active dendrites enable multi- task learning in dynamic environments”. In: Frontiers in neurorobotics 16 (2022), p. 846219. 19

2022
[10]

Approximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function

George Cybenko. “Approximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function”. In: Mathematics of control, sig- nals and systems 2.4 (1989), pp. 303–314

1989
[11]

On the power of over- parametrization in neural networks with quadratic acti- vation

Simon Du and Jason Lee. “On the power of over- parametrization in neural networks with quadratic acti- vation”. In: International conference on machine learn- ing. PMLR. 2018, pp. 1329–1338

2018
[12]

Advancements in microprocessor ar- chitecture for ubiquitous AI—An overview on history, evolution, and upcoming challenges in AI implementa- tion

Fatima Hameed Khan, Muhammad Adeel Pasha, and Shahid Masud. “Advancements in microprocessor ar- chitecture for ubiquitous AI—An overview on history, evolution, and upcoming challenges in AI implementa- tion”. In: Micromachines 12.6 (2021), p. 665

2021
[13]

GPU: the biggest key processor for AI and parallel processing

Toru Baji. “GPU: the biggest key processor for AI and parallel processing”. In: Photomask Japan 2017: XXIV Symposium on Photomask and Next-Generation Lithography Mask Technology. V ol. 10454. SPIE. 2017, pp. 24–29

2017
[14]

Artificial intelligence for decision making in the era of Big Data–evolution, challenges and research agenda

Yanqing Duan, John S Edwards, and Yogesh K Dwivedi. “Artificial intelligence for decision making in the era of Big Data–evolution, challenges and research agenda”. In: International journal of information man- agement 48 (2019), pp. 63–71

2019
[15]

Machine learning in computer vision: a review

Abdullah Ayub Khan, Asif Ali Laghari, and Shafique Ahmed Awan. “Machine learning in computer vision: a review”. In: EAI Endorsed Transactions on Scalable Information Systems 8.32 (2021), e4–e4

2021
[16]

Deep learning in computer vision: A critical re- view of emerging techniques and application scenar- ios

Junyi Chai, Hao Zeng, Anming Li, and Eric WT Ngai. “Deep learning in computer vision: A critical re- view of emerging techniques and application scenar- ios”. In: Machine Learning with Applications 6 (2021), p. 100134

2021
[17]

A sur- vey of large language models

Wayne Xin Zhao, Kun Zhou, Junyi Li, Tianyi Tang, Xiaolei Wang, Yupeng Hou, Yingqian Min, Beichen Zhang, Junjie Zhang, Zican Dong, et al. “A sur- vey of large language models”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.18223 (2023)

2023 arXiv
[18]

Recent advances in natural language processing via large pre-trained lan- guage models: A survey

Bonan Min, Hayley Ross, Elior Sulem, Amir Pouran Ben Veyseh, Thien Huu Nguyen, Oscar Sainz, Eneko Agirre, Ilana Heintz, and Dan Roth. “Recent advances in natural language processing via large pre-trained lan- guage models: A survey”. In: ACM Computing Surveys 56.2 (2023), pp. 1–40

2023
[19]

Deep reinforcement learning: An overview

Yuxi Li. “Deep reinforcement learning: An overview”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1701.07274 (2017)

2017 arXiv
[20]

AI-GAs: AI-generating algorithms, an al- ternate paradigm for producing general artificial intelli- gence

Jeff Clune. “AI-GAs: AI-generating algorithms, an al- ternate paradigm for producing general artificial intelli- gence”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.10985 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[21]

A critique of pure learning and what artificial neural networks can learn from ani- mal brains

Anthony M Zador. “A critique of pure learning and what artificial neural networks can learn from ani- mal brains”. In: Nature communications 10.1 (2019), p. 3770

2019
[22]

Deep learning: A critical appraisal

Gary Marcus. “Deep learning: A critical appraisal”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.00631 (2018)

2018 arXiv
[23]

A path towards autonomous machine in- telligence version 0.9. 2, 2022-06-27

Yann LeCun. “A path towards autonomous machine in- telligence version 0.9. 2, 2022-06-27”. In:Open Review 62.1 (2022)

2022
[24]

Data-centric artificial intelligence: A survey

Daochen Zha, Zaid Pervaiz Bhat, Kwei-Herng Lai, Fan Yang, Zhimeng Jiang, Shaochen Zhong, and Xia Hu. “Data-centric artificial intelligence: A survey”. In:ACM Computing Surveys 57.5 (2025), pp. 1–42

2025
[25]

AI’s Dependency on High-Quality Data: A Double-Edged Sword for Organizations - in- sideAI News — insideainews.com

Contributor. AI’s Dependency on High-Quality Data: A Double-Edged Sword for Organizations - in- sideAI News — insideainews.com . https : / / insideainews . com / 2024 / 09 / 17 / ais - dependency - on - high - quality - data - a - double - edged - sword - for - organizations/....

2024
[26]

van de Ven, Nicholas Soures, and Dhireesha Kudithipudi

Gido M. van de Ven, Nicholas Soures, and Dhireesha Kudithipudi. Continual Learning and Catastrophic For- getting. 2024. arXiv: 2403.05175 [cs.LG] . URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.05175

2024 arXiv
[27]

Embracing change: Continual learning in deep neural networks

Raia Hadsell, Dushyant Rao, Andrei A Rusu, and Raz- van Pascanu. “Embracing change: Continual learning in deep neural networks”. In: Trends in cognitive sciences 24.12 (2020), pp. 1028–1040

2020
[28]

Experience replay for continual learning

David Rolnick, Arun Ahuja, Jonathan Schwarz, Timo- thy Lillicrap, and Gregory Wayne. “Experience replay for continual learning”. In: Advances in neural infor- mation processing systems 32 (2019)

2019
[29]

Rethinking experience replay: a bag of tricks for continual learning

Pietro Buzzega, Matteo Boschini, Angelo Porrello, and Simone Calderara. “Rethinking experience replay: a bag of tricks for continual learning”. In: 2020 25th In- ternational Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR). IEEE. 2021, pp. 2180–2187

2020
[30]

Dark experience for general continual learning: a strong, simple baseline

Pietro Buzzega, Matteo Boschini, Angelo Porrello, Da- vide Abati, and Simone Calderara. “Dark experience for general continual learning: a strong, simple baseline”. In: Advances in neural information processing systems 33 (2020), pp. 15920–15930

2020
[31]

Continually learning representations at scale

Alexandre Galashov, Jovana Mitrovic, Dhruva Tiru- mala, Yee Whye Teh, Timothy Nguyen, Arslan Chaudhry, and Razvan Pascanu. “Continually learning representations at scale”. In: Conference on Lifelong Learning Agents. PMLR. 2023, pp. 534–547

2023
[32]

Task De- tection in Continual Learning via Familiarity Autoen- coders

Maxwell J Jacobson, Case Q Wright, Nan Jiang, Gus- tavo Rodriguez-Rivera, and Yexiang Xue. “Task De- tection in Continual Learning via Familiarity Autoen- coders”. In: 2022 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC) . IEEE. 2022, pp. 1–8

2022
[33]

Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networks

James Kirkpatrick, Razvan Pascanu, Neil Rabinowitz, Joel Veness, Guillaume Desjardins, Andrei A Rusu, Kieran Milan, John Quan, Tiago Ramalho, Agnieszka Grabska-Barwinska, et al. “Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networks”. In: Proceedings of the national academy of...

2017
[34]

Continual learning with lifelong vision transformer

Zhen Wang, Liu Liu, Yiqun Duan, Yajing Kong, and Dacheng Tao. “Continual learning with lifelong vision transformer”. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition . 2022, pp. 171–181

2022
[35]

Progressive neural networks

Andrei A Rusu, Neil C Rabinowitz, Guillaume Desjardins, Hubert Soyer, James Kirkpatrick, Ko- ray Kavukcuoglu, Razvan Pascanu, and Raia Had- sell. “Progressive neural networks”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.04671 (2016)

2016 arXiv
[36]

Directed Struc- tural Adaptation to Overcome Statistical Conflicts and Enable Continual Learning

Zeki Doruk Erden and Boi Faltings. “Directed Struc- tural Adaptation to Overcome Statistical Conflicts and Enable Continual Learning”. In: AAAI 2024 . Deploy- able AI Workshop. 2024

2024
[37]

A neural dirichlet process mixture model for task-free continual learning

Soochan Lee, Junsoo Ha, Dongsu Zhang, and Gun- hee Kim. “A neural dirichlet process mixture model for task-free continual learning”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.00689 (2020)

2020 arXiv
[38]

How do Active Dendrite Networks Mitigate Catas- trophic Forgetting?

Sankarshan Damle, Satya Lokam, and Navin Goyal. “How do Active Dendrite Networks Mitigate Catas- trophic Forgetting?” In: The First Workshop on Neu- roAI@ NeurIPS2024
[39]

A survey on in-context learning

Qingxiu Dong, Lei Li, Damai Dai, Ce Zheng, Jingyuan Ma, Rui Li, Heming Xia, Jingjing Xu, Zhiyong Wu, Tianyu Liu, et al. “A survey on in-context learning”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.00234 (2022)

2022 arXiv
[40]

Sim-to-real transfer in deep reinforcement learn- ing for robotics: a survey

Wenshuai Zhao, Jorge Pe ˜na Queralta, and Tomi Wester- lund. “Sim-to-real transfer in deep reinforcement learn- ing for robotics: a survey”. In: 2020 IEEE sympo- sium series on computational intelligence (SSCI). IEEE. 2020, pp. 737–744

2020
[41]

Challenges, evaluation and opportunities for open-world learning

Mayank Kejriwal, Eric Kildebeck, Robert Steininger, and Abhinav Shrivastava. “Challenges, evaluation and opportunities for open-world learning”. In: Nature Ma- chine Intelligence 6.6 (2024), pp. 580–588

2024
[42]

Towards Lifelong Unseen Task Processing With a Lightweight Unlabeled Data Schema for AIoT

Tianyu Tu, Zhili He, Zhigao Zheng, Zimu Zheng, Ji- awei Jiang, Yili Gong, Chuang Hu, and Dazhao Cheng. “Towards Lifelong Unseen Task Processing With a Lightweight Unlabeled Data Schema for AIoT”. In: IEEE Internet of Things Journal (2024)

2024
[43]

Neural task graphs: Generalizing to unseen tasks from a single video demonstration

De-An Huang, Suraj Nair, Danfei Xu, Yuke Zhu, Ani- mesh Garg, Li Fei-Fei, Silvio Savarese, and Juan Carlos Niebles. “Neural task graphs: Generalizing to unseen tasks from a single video demonstration”. In: Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern...

2019
[44]

An introduction to convolutional neural networks

Keiron O’shea and Ryan Nash. “An introduction to convolutional neural networks”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.08458 (2015)

2015 arXiv
[45]

FocusLearn: Fully-Interpretable, High-Performance Modular Neural Networks for Time Series

Qiqi Su, Christos Kloukinas, and Artur d’Avila Garcez. “FocusLearn: Fully-Interpretable, High-Performance Modular Neural Networks for Time Series”. In: 2024 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN). IEEE. 2024, pp. 1–8

2024
[46]

Object files and schemata: Factorizing declarative and procedural knowledge in dynamical systems

Anirudh Goyal, Alex Lamb, Phanideep Gampa, Philippe Beaudoin, Sergey Levine, Charles Blundell, Yoshua Bengio, and Michael Mozer. “Object files and schemata: Factorizing declarative and procedural knowledge in dynamical systems”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.16225 (2020)

2020 arXiv
[47]

Hierarchical reinforcement learning: A comprehensive survey

Shubham Pateria, Budhitama Subagdja, Ah-hwee Tan, and Chai Quek. “Hierarchical reinforcement learning: A comprehensive survey”. In:ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 54.5 (2021), pp. 1–35

2021
[48]

Explainable AI: A brief survey on history, research areas, approaches and chal- lenges

Feiyu Xu, Hans Uszkoreit, Yangzhou Du, Wei Fan, Dongyan Zhao, and Jun Zhu. “Explainable AI: A brief survey on history, research areas, approaches and chal- lenges”. In: Natural Language Processing and Chi- nese Computing: 8th CCF International Conference, NLPCC 2019, Dunhuang,...

2019
[49]

A mod- ern approach

P Russel Norvig and S Artificial Intelligence. “A mod- ern approach”. In: Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Rani, M., Nayak, R., & Vyas, OP (2015). An ontology-based adaptive personalized e-learning system, assisted by software agents on cloud storage. Knowledge-Based...

2015
[50]

Au- tomated planning and acting

Malik Ghallab, Dana Nau, and Paolo Traverso. Au- tomated planning and acting . Cambridge University Press, 2016

2016
[51]

A survey on the integration of machine learning with sampling-based motion planning

Troy McMahon, Aravind Sivaramakrishnan, Edgar Granados, Kostas E Bekris, et al. “A survey on the integration of machine learning with sampling-based motion planning”. In: Foundations and Trends® in Robotics 9.4 (2022), pp. 266–327

2022
[52]

A survey of machine learning ap- proaches to robotic path-planning

Michael W Otte. “A survey of machine learning ap- proaches to robotic path-planning”. In: University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder (2015)

2015
[53]

A review of machine learning for automated planning

Sergio Jim ´enez, Tom´as De La Rosa, Susana Fern´andez, Fernando Fern ´andez, and Daniel Borrajo. “A review of machine learning for automated planning”. In: The Knowledge Engineering Review 27.4 (2012), pp. 433– 467

2012
[54]

Learning safe numeric action models

Argaman Mordoch, Brendan Juba, and Roni Stern. “Learning safe numeric action models”. In: Proceed- ings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence . V ol. 37. 10. 2023, pp. 12079–12086

2023
[55]

Asking the right questions: Learning inter- pretable action models through query answering

Pulkit Verma, Shashank Rao Marpally, and Siddharth Srivastava. “Asking the right questions: Learning inter- pretable action models through query answering”. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intel- ligence. V ol. 35. 13. 2021, pp. 12024–12033

2021
[56]

Efficient, safe, and prob- ably approximately complete learning of action mod- els

Roni Stern and Brendan Juba. “Efficient, safe, and prob- ably approximately complete learning of action mod- els”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1705.08961 (2017). 21

2017 arXiv
[57]

Towards cog- nitive ai systems: a survey and prospective on neuro- symbolic ai

Zishen Wan, Che-Kai Liu, Hanchen Yang, Chaojian Li, Haoran You, Yonggan Fu, Cheng Wan, Tushar Krishna, Yingyan Lin, and Arijit Raychowdhury. “Towards cog- nitive ai systems: a survey and prospective on neuro- symbolic ai”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.01040 (2024)

2024 arXiv
[58]

Neuro- Symbolic AI in 2024: A Systematic Review

Brandon C Colelough and William Regli. “Neuro- Symbolic AI in 2024: A Systematic Review”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.05435 (2025)

2025 arXiv
[59]

On the origin of species: A facsimile of the first edition

Charles Darwin. On the origin of species: A facsimile of the first edition. Harvard University Press, 1964

1964
[60]

Modern evolutionary economics: An overview

Richard R Nelson, Giovanni Dosi, Constance E Helfat, and Andreas Pyka. “Modern evolutionary economics: An overview”. In: (2018)

2018
[61]

Quantum darwinism

Wojciech Hubert Zurek. “Quantum darwinism”. In: Na- ture physics 5.3 (2009), pp. 181–188

2009
[62]

Evolutionary algorithms

Thomas Bartz-Beielstein, J ¨urgen Branke, J¨orn Mehnen, and Olaf Mersmann. “Evolutionary algorithms”. In:Wi- ley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowl- edge Discovery 4.3 (2014), pp. 178–195

2014
[63]

The plausibility of life

Kirschner Marc. The plausibility of life. Yale University Press, 2005

2005
[64]

Evolutionary connectionism: algorithmic principles underlying the evolution of biological organisation in evo-devo, evo-eco and evolutionary transitions

Richard A Watson, Rob Mills, CL Buckley, Kostas Kouvaris, Adam Jackson, Simon T Powers, Chris Cox, Simon Tudge, Adam Davies, Loizos Kounios, et al. “Evolutionary connectionism: algorithmic principles underlying the evolution of biological organisation in evo-devo, evo-eco and ...

2016
[65]

Evolution: The Modern Synthesis

Julian Huxley. Evolution: The Modern Synthesis. 1942

1942
[66]

Scott F. Gilbert. Developmental Biology. 6th. A New Evolutionary Synthesis. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer As- sociates, 2000. URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/books/NBK10128/

2000
[67]

Evo- lution, Theory of

Gregory C. Mayer and Catherine L. Craig. “Evo- lution, Theory of”. In: Encyclopedia of Biodiversity (Second Edition) . Ed. by Simon A Levin. Second Edition. Waltham: Academic Press, 2013, pp. 392–

2013
[68]

12 - Population Genetics

H. Richard Johnston, Bronya J.B. Keats, and Stephanie L. Sherman. “12 - Population Genetics”. In: Emery and Rimoin’s Principles and Practice of Medical Ge- netics and Genomics (Seventh Edition) . Ed. by Reed E. Pyeritz, Bruce R. Korf, and Wayne W. Grody. Seventh Edition. Acade...

2019
[69]

Organisms, agency, and evolution

Denis M Walsh. Organisms, agency, and evolution . Cambridge University Press, 2015

2015
[70]

S.B. Carroll. Endless Forms Most Beautiful: The New Science of Evo Devo and the Making of the Ani- mal Kingdom . ISSR Library. W.W. Norton & Com- pany, 2005. ISBN : 9780393060164. URL: https : / / books . google . ch / books ? id = CnnGKjzw3xMC

2005
[71]

The extended evolutionary synthesis: its structure, assumptions and predictions

Kevin N Laland, Tobias Uller, Marcus W Feldman, Kim Sterelny, Gerd B M¨uller, Armin Moczek, Eva Jablonka, and John Odling-Smee. “The extended evolutionary synthesis: its structure, assumptions and predictions”. In: Proceedings of the royal society B: biological sci- ences 282....

2015
[72]

Antibiotic resistance: the perfect storm

IM Gould. “Antibiotic resistance: the perfect storm”. In: International journal of antimicrobial agents34 (2009), S2–S5

2009
[73]

Medicine in the Light of Evolution

Olga Dolgova and Oscar Lao. Medicine in the Light of Evolution. 2018

2018
[74]

Evolution in agriculture: the application of evolutionary approaches to the management of biotic interactions in agro-ecosystems

Peter H Thrall, John G Oakeshott, Gary Fitt, Simon Southerton, Jeremy J Burdon, Andy Sheppard, Robyn J Russell, Myron Zalucki, Mikko Heino, and R Ford Denison. “Evolution in agriculture: the application of evolutionary approaches to the management of biotic interactions in agr...

2011
[75]

Why evolution matters for species con- servation: perspectives from three case studies of plant metapopulations

Isabelle Olivieri, Jeanne Tonnabel, Oph ´elie Ronce, and Agn`es Mignot. “Why evolution matters for species con- servation: perspectives from three case studies of plant metapopulations”. In: Evolutionary Applications 9.1 (2016), pp. 196–211

2016
[76]

Re- duce, reuse, and recycle: developmental evolution of trait diversification

Jill C Preston, Lena C Hileman, and Pilar Cubas. “Re- duce, reuse, and recycle: developmental evolution of trait diversification”. In: American Journal of Botany 98.3 (2011), pp. 397–403

2011
[77]

Neural reuse: A fundamental or- ganizational principle of the brain

Michael L Anderson. “Neural reuse: A fundamental or- ganizational principle of the brain”. In: Behavioral and brain sciences 33.4 (2010), pp. 245–266

2010
[78]

Levels of organization and repeti- tion phenomena in seed plants

Daniel Barth ´el´emy. “Levels of organization and repeti- tion phenomena in seed plants”. In: Acta Biotheoretica 39.3-4 (1991), pp. 309–323

1991
[79]

The many faces of pleiotropy

Annalise B Paaby and Matthew V Rockman. “The many faces of pleiotropy”. In: Trends in genetics 29.2 (2013), pp. 66–73

2013
[80]

The evolution of phenotypic correlations and “developmental mem- ory

Richard A Watson, G ¨unter P Wagner, Mihaela Pavlicev, Daniel M Weinreich, and Rob Mills. “The evolution of phenotypic correlations and “developmental mem- ory””. In: Evolution 68.4 (2014), pp. 1124–1138

2014
[81]

Evolution of corre- lated characters

Trevor Price and Tom Langen. “Evolution of corre- lated characters”. In: Trends in Ecology & Evolution7.9 (1992), pp. 307–310

1992
[82]

The emergence of modularity in biological systems

Dirk M Lorenz, Alice Jeng, and Michael W Deem. “The emergence of modularity in biological systems”. In: Physics of life reviews 8.2 (2011), pp. 129–160. 22

2011
[83]

Modularity and reliability in the organization of organisms

Bertrand S Clarke and Jay E Mittenthal. “Modularity and reliability in the organization of organisms”. In: Bulletin of Mathematical Biology 54.1 (1992), pp. 1– 20

1992
[84]

Mod- ularity of biological systems: a link between structure and function

Claus Kadelka, Matthew Wheeler, Alan Veliz-Cuba, David Murrugarra, and Reinhard Laubenbacher. “Mod- ularity of biological systems: a link between structure and function”. In: Journal of the Royal Society Inter- face 20.207 (2023), p. 20230505

2023
[85]

The evolutionary origins of modularity

Jeff Clune, Jean-Baptiste Mouret, and Hod Lipson. “The evolutionary origins of modularity”. In: Pro- ceedings of the Royal Society b: Biological sciences 280.1755 (2013), p. 20122863

2013
[86]

The road to modularity

G ¨unter P Wagner, Mihaela Pavlicev, and James M Cheverud. “The road to modularity”. In: Nature Re- views Genetics 8.12 (2007), pp. 921–931

2007
[87]

The evolutionary origins of hierarchy

Henok Mengistu, Joost Huizinga, Jean-Baptiste Mouret, and Jeff Clune. “The evolutionary origins of hierarchy”. In: PLoS computational biology 12.6 (2016), e1004829

2016
[88]

Tensegrity I. Cell structure and hi- erarchical systems biology

Donald E Ingber. “Tensegrity I. Cell structure and hi- erarchical systems biology”. In: Journal of cell science 116.7 (2003), pp. 1157–1173

2003
[89]

Networks of networks: an essay on multi-level biological organization

VN Uversky and A Giuliani. Networks of networks: an essay on multi-level biological organization. Front Genet 2021; 12: 706260. 2021

2021
[90]

Hierarchies in biology

Marjorie Grene. “Hierarchies in biology”. In: American Scientist 75.5 (1987), pp. 504–510

1987
[91]

Exploring the significance of structural hi- erarchy in material systems—A review

Ning Pan. “Exploring the significance of structural hi- erarchy in material systems—A review”. In: Applied Physics Reviews 1.2 (2014)

2014
[92]

Optimization theory in evolution

J Maynard Smith. “Optimization theory in evolution”. In: Annual review of ecology and systematics 9 (1978), pp. 31–56

1978
[93]

Punctuated equilibria: the tempo and mode of evolution reconsid- ered

Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge. “Punctuated equilibria: the tempo and mode of evolution reconsid- ered”. In: Paleobiology 3.2 (1977), pp. 115–151

1977
[94]

The major transitions in evolution

John Maynard Smith and Eors Szathmary. The major transitions in evolution. OUP Oxford, 1997

1997
[95]

The Biological Big Bang model for the major transitions in evolution

Eugene V Koonin. “The Biological Big Bang model for the major transitions in evolution”. In: Biology Direct 2 (2007), pp. 1–17

2007
[96]

Exponential evolution: implications for intelligent extraterrestrial life

Dale A Russell. “Exponential evolution: implications for intelligent extraterrestrial life”. In: Advances in Space Research 3.9 (1983), pp. 95–103

1983
[97]

Genome increase as a clock for the origin and evolution of life

Alexei A Sharov. “Genome increase as a clock for the origin and evolution of life”. In: Biology Direct 1 (2006), pp. 1–10

2006
[98]

Evolutionary transitions: how do levels of complexity emerge?

Francis Heylighen. “Evolutionary transitions: how do levels of complexity emerge?” In:COMPLEXITY-NEW YORK- 6.1 (2000), pp. 53–57

2000
[99]

The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology

Ray Kurzweil. The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology . Penguin (Non-Classics), 2006. ISBN : 0143037889

2006
[100]

Timeline: The evolution of life — newscientist.com

Michael Marshall. Timeline: The evolution of life — newscientist.com . https : / / www . newscientist . com / article / dn17453 - timeline - the - evolution - of - life/ . [Accessed 20-02-2025]

2025
[101]

D. Futuyma. Evolution. Sinauer, 2013. ISBN : 9781605351155. URL: https://books.google. ch/books?id=YkrRlwEACAAJ

2013
[102]

The theory of fa- cilitated variation

John Gerhart and Marc Kirschner. “The theory of fa- cilitated variation”. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104.suppl 1 (2007), pp. 8582– 8589

2007
[103]

The evolution of multicellularity: a minor major transition?

Richard K Grosberg and Richard R Strathmann. “The evolution of multicellularity: a minor major transition?” In: Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 38.1 (2007), pp. 621– 654

2007
[104]

Division of labour and the evolution of mul- ticellularity

Iaroslav Ispolatov, Martin Ackermann, and Michael Doebeli. “Division of labour and the evolution of mul- ticellularity”. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 279.1734 (2012), pp. 1768–1776

2012
[105]

The emerging view on the origin and early evolution of eukaryotic cells

Julian V osseberg, Jolien JE van Hooff, Stephan K ¨ostl- bacher, Kassiani Panagiotou, Daniel Tamarit, and Thijs JG Ettema. “The emerging view on the origin and early evolution of eukaryotic cells”. In: Nature 633.8029 (2024), pp. 295–305

2024
[106]

Genetic algorithms

SN Sivanandam, SN Deepa, SN Sivanandam, and SN Deepa. Genetic algorithms. Springer, 2008

2008
[107]

Design optimization of a space launch vehicle using a genetic algorithm

Douglas J Bayley, Roy J Hartfield Jr, John E Burkhal- ter, and Rhonald M Jenkins. “Design optimization of a space launch vehicle using a genetic algorithm”. In: Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 45.4 (2008), pp. 733–740

2008
[108]

Neural networks optimization through genetic algorithm searches: a review

Haruna Chiroma, Ahmad Shukri Mohd Noor, Sameem Abdulkareem, Adamu I Abubakar, Arief Hermawan, Hongwu Qin, Mukhtar Fatihu Hamza, and Tutut Her- awan. “Neural networks optimization through genetic algorithm searches: a review”. In: Appl. Math. Inf. Sci 11.6 (2017), pp. 1543–1564

2017
[109]

A study of direct and indirect encoding in phenotype-genotype relationships

Clyde Meli, Vitezslav Nezval, Zuzana Kominkova Oplatkova, Victor Buttigieg, and Anthony Spiteri Staines. “A study of direct and indirect encoding in phenotype-genotype relationships”. In: Artificial Intel- ligence and Soft Computing: 20th International Con- ference, ICAISC 202...

2021
[110]

Indirect encoding of neural networks for scalable go

Jason Gauci and Kenneth O Stanley. “Indirect encoding of neural networks for scalable go”. In: International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature . Springer. 2010, pp. 354–363

2010
[111]

Developmental plasticity and evolution

Mary Jane West-Eberhard. Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford University Press, 2003. 23

2003
[112]

Non-coding DNA–a brief review

Anandakumar Shanmugam, Arumugam Nagarajan, and Shanmughavel Pramanayagam. “Non-coding DNA–a brief review”. In: Journal of Applied Biology and Biotechnology 5 (2017), pp. 42–47

2017
[113]

Not junk after all

Wojciech Makalowski. “Not junk after all”. In: Science 300.5623 (2003), pp. 1246–1247

2003
[114]

Effects of four different reg- ulatory mechanisms on the dynamics of gene regulatory cascades

Sabine Hansen, Sandeep Krishna, Szabolcs Semsey, and Sine Lo Svenningsen. “Effects of four different reg- ulatory mechanisms on the dynamics of gene regulatory cascades”. In: Scientific Reports 5.1 (2015), p. 12186

2015
[115]

Network biology: understanding the cell’s functional organiza- tion

Albert-Laszlo Barabasi and Zoltan N Oltvai. “Network biology: understanding the cell’s functional organiza- tion”. In: Nature reviews genetics 5.2 (2004), pp. 101– 113

2004
[116]

Stochastic modeling of autoregulatory genetic feed- back loops: A review and comparative study

James Holehouse, Zhixing Cao, and Ramon Grima. “Stochastic modeling of autoregulatory genetic feed- back loops: A review and comparative study”. In: Bio- physical Journal 118.7 (2020), pp. 1517–1525

2020
[117]

Structure and function of neg- ative feedback loops at the interface of genetic and metabolic networks

Sandeep Krishna, Anna MC Andersson, Szabolcs Sem- sey, and Kim Sneppen. “Structure and function of neg- ative feedback loops at the interface of genetic and metabolic networks”. In: Nucleic acids research 34.8 (2006), pp. 2455–2462

2006
[118]

The nonlinearity of regulation in biological networks

Santosh Manicka, Kathleen Johnson, Michael Levin, and David Murrugarra. “The nonlinearity of regulation in biological networks”. In: NPJ Systems Biology and Applications 9.1 (2023), p. 10

2023
[119]

The regulatory genome: gene regula- tory networks in development and evolution

Eric H Davidson. The regulatory genome: gene regula- tory networks in development and evolution . Elsevier, 2010

2010
[120]

Gene regulatory networks for development

Michael Levine and Eric H Davidson. “Gene regulatory networks for development”. In: Proceedings of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences 102.14 (2005), pp. 4936– 4942

2005
[121]

Induction of ectopic eyes by targeted expression of the eyeless gene in Drosophila

Georg Halder, Patrick Callaerts, and Walter J Gehring. “Induction of ectopic eyes by targeted expression of the eyeless gene in Drosophila”. In: Science 267.5205 (1995), pp. 1788–1792

1995
[122]

Modularity in biological net- works

Sergio Antonio Alcal ´a-Corona, Santiago Sandoval- Motta, Jesus Espinal-Enriquez, and Enrique Hernandez-Lemus. “Modularity in biological net- works”. In: Frontiers in Genetics 12 (2021), p. 701331

2021
[123]

Modularity, criticality, and evolvability of a develop- mental gene regulatory network

Berta Verd, Nicholas AM Monk, and Johannes Jaeger. “Modularity, criticality, and evolvability of a develop- mental gene regulatory network”. In: Elife 8 (2019), e42832

2019
[124]

The pleiotropic structure of the genotype–phenotype map: the evolv- ability of complex organisms

G ¨unter P Wagner and Jianzhi Zhang. “The pleiotropic structure of the genotype–phenotype map: the evolv- ability of complex organisms”. In: Nature Reviews Ge- netics 12.3 (2011), pp. 204–213

2011
[125]

Evolutionary and developmental as- pects of avian-specific traits in limb skeletal pattern

Ryohei Seki, Namiko Kamiyama, Ayumi Tadokoro, Naoki Nomura, Takanobu Tsuihiji, Makoto Manabe, and Koji Tamura. “Evolutionary and developmental as- pects of avian-specific traits in limb skeletal pattern”. In: Zoological science 29.10 (2012), pp. 631–644

2012
[126]

Early diversification of avian limb morphology and the role of modularity in the locomotor evolution of crown birds

Chad M Eliason, James V Proffitt, and Julia A Clarke. “Early diversification of avian limb morphology and the role of modularity in the locomotor evolution of crown birds”. In: Evolution 77.2 (2023), pp. 342–354

2023
[127]

Homeotic genes and the evolution of arthropods and chordates

Sean B Carroll. “Homeotic genes and the evolution of arthropods and chordates”. In: Nature 376.6540 (1995), pp. 479–485

1995
[128]

Phenotypes to remember: Evolutionary developmental memory capacity and robustness

Andr ´as Szil´agyi, P´eter Szab ´o, Mauro Santos, and E ¨ors Szathm´ary. “Phenotypes to remember: Evolutionary developmental memory capacity and robustness”. In: PLoS computational biology 16.11 (2020), e1008425

2020
[129]

Environmental factors and growth

JR Brett. “Environmental factors and growth”. In: Fish physiology. V ol. 8. Elsevier, 1979, pp. 599–675

1979
[130]

Ef- fect of internal and external factors on root growth and development

Jonathan Lynch, Petra Marschner, and Zed Rengel. “Ef- fect of internal and external factors on root growth and development”. In: Marschner’s mineral nutrition of higher plants. Elsevier, 2012, pp. 331–346

2012
[131]

[Accessed 21-02-2025]

It’s time to admit that genes are not the blueprint for life — nature.com. [Accessed 21-02-2025]

2025
[132]

A Tcf4-positive mesodermal population provides a prepattern for vertebrate limb muscle patterning

Gabrielle Kardon, Brian D Harfe, and Clifford J Tabin. “A Tcf4-positive mesodermal population provides a prepattern for vertebrate limb muscle patterning”. In: Developmental cell 5.6 (2003), pp. 937–944

2003
[133]

Limb muscle de- velopment

Bodo Christ and Beate Brand-Saberi. “Limb muscle de- velopment”. In: International Journal of Developmen- tal Biology 46.7 (2002), pp. 905–914

2002
[134]

Regulation of axonal growth and neuromuscular junction formation by neu- ronal phosphatase and tensin homologue signaling

Pan P Li and H Benjamin Peng. “Regulation of axonal growth and neuromuscular junction formation by neu- ronal phosphatase and tensin homologue signaling”. In: Molecular biology of the cell 23.20 (2012), pp. 4109– 4117

2012
[135]

The self-assembling brain: how neural networks grow smarter

Peter Robin Hiesinger. “The self-assembling brain: how neural networks grow smarter”. In: (2021)

2021
[136]

Angiogene- sis

Thomas Adair and Jean-Pierre Montani. “Angiogene- sis”. In: (2010)

2010
[137]

The biology of VEGF and its receptors

Napoleone Ferrara, Hans-Peter Gerber, and Jennifer LeCouter. “The biology of VEGF and its receptors”. In: Nature medicine 9.6 (2003), pp. 669–676

2003
[138]

Polydactyly: phenotypes, genetics and classification

SAJID Malik. “Polydactyly: phenotypes, genetics and classification”. In: Clinical Genetics 85.3 (2014), pp. 203–212

2014
[139]

A modification of Jerne’s theory of antibody production using the concept of clonal selection

Frank Macfarlane Burnet. “A modification of Jerne’s theory of antibody production using the concept of clonal selection.” In: (1957)

1957
[140]

Clonal selection and learning in the antibody system

Klaus Rajewsky. “Clonal selection and learning in the antibody system”. In:Nature 381.6585 (1996), pp. 751– 758. 24

1996
[141]

Synaptogenesis in visual cortex of normal and preterm monkeys: evidence for intrinsic regulation of synaptic overproduction

Jean-Pierre Bourgeois, Pawel J Jastreboff, and Pasko Rakic. “Synaptogenesis in visual cortex of normal and preterm monkeys: evidence for intrinsic regulation of synaptic overproduction.” In: Proceedings of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences 86.11 (1989), pp. 4297– 4301

1989
[142]

Concurrent overproduction of synapses in diverse re- gions of the primate cerebral cortex

Pasko Rakic, Jean-Pierre Bourgeois, Maryellen F Eck- enhoff, Nada Zecevic, and Patricia S Goldman-Rakic. “Concurrent overproduction of synapses in diverse re- gions of the primate cerebral cortex”. In: Science 232.4747 (1986), pp. 232–235

1986
[143]

Synaptic pruning in development: a computational ac- count

Gal Chechik, Isaac Meilijson, and Eytan Ruppin. “Synaptic pruning in development: a computational ac- count”. In: Neural computation 10.7 (1998), pp. 1759– 1777

1998
[144]

How synaptic pruning shapes neural wiring during development and, possibly, in disease

Jill Sakai. “How synaptic pruning shapes neural wiring during development and, possibly, in disease”. In: Pro- ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117.28 (2020), pp. 16096–16099

2020
[145]

Dendritic spines: synaptogenesis and synaptic pruning for the developmental organization of brain circuits

Zdravko Petanjek, Ivan Banovac, Dora Sedmak, and Ana Hladnik. “Dendritic spines: synaptogenesis and synaptic pruning for the developmental organization of brain circuits”. In: Dendritic spines: structure, function, and plasticity. Springer, 2023, pp. 143–221

2023
[146]

Axon overproduction and elimination in the corpus callosum of the develop- ing rhesus monkey

AS LaMantia and P Rakic. “Axon overproduction and elimination in the corpus callosum of the develop- ing rhesus monkey”. In: Journal of Neuroscience 10.7 (1990), pp. 2156–2175

1990
[147]

Overproduction and elimination of retinal axons in the fetal rhesus mon- key

Pasko Rakic and Katharine P Riley. “Overproduction and elimination of retinal axons in the fetal rhesus mon- key”. In: Science 219.4591 (1983), pp. 1441–1444

1983
[148]

Human fetal optic nerve: overproduction and elimination of retinal axons during development

Jan M Provis, Diana Van Driel, Frank A Billson, and Peter Russell. “Human fetal optic nerve: overproduction and elimination of retinal axons during development”. In: Journal of Comparative Neurology 238.1 (1985), pp. 92–100

1985
[149]

A simple rule for axon outgrowth and synap- tic competition generates realistic connection lengths and filling fractions

Marcus Kaiser, Claus C Hilgetag, and Arjen Van Ooyen. “A simple rule for axon outgrowth and synap- tic competition generates realistic connection lengths and filling fractions”. In: Cerebral cortex 19.12 (2009), pp. 3001–3010

2009
[150]

Exuberant growth, speci- ficity, and selection in the differentiation of cortical ax- ons

GM Innocenti and L Tettoni. “Exuberant growth, speci- ficity, and selection in the differentiation of cortical ax- ons”. In: Normal and abnormal development of the cor- tex. Springer, 1997, pp. 99–120

1997
[151]

Genomic evo- lution of Hox gene clusters

Derek Lemons and William McGinnis. “Genomic evo- lution of Hox gene clusters”. In: Science 313.5795 (2006), pp. 1918–1922

2006
[152]

The evolution of the Wnt path- way

Thomas W Holstein. “The evolution of the Wnt path- way”. In: Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology 4.7 (2012), a007922

2012
[153]

Evolution of the cytoskeleton

Harold P Erickson. “Evolution of the cytoskeleton”. In: Bioessays 29.7 (2007), pp. 668–677

2007
[154]

Evolution of multi- subunit RNA polymerases in the three domains of life

Finn Werner and Dina Grohmann. “Evolution of multi- subunit RNA polymerases in the three domains of life”. In: Nature Reviews Microbiology9.2 (2011), pp. 85–98

2011
[155]

Evolution of glycolysis

Linda A Fothergill-Gilmore and Paul AM Michels. “Evolution of glycolysis”. In: Progress in biophysics and molecular biology 59.2 (1993), pp. 105–235

1993
[156]

Sonic snakes and regulation of limb formation

Darren J Burgess. “Sonic snakes and regulation of limb formation”. In: Nature Reviews Genetics 17.12 (2016), pp. 715–715

2016
[157]

Sonic hedgehog signaling in limb development

Cheryll Tickle and Matthew Towers. “Sonic hedgehog signaling in limb development”. In:Frontiers in cell and developmental biology 5 (2017), p. 14

2017
[158]

Divergence and rewiring of regulatory net- works for neural development between human and other species

Ping Wang, Dejian Zhao, Shira Rockowitz, and Deyou Zheng. “Divergence and rewiring of regulatory net- works for neural development between human and other species”. In: Neurogenesis 3.1 (2016), pp. 5730–5743

2016
[159]

Young transpos- able elements rewired gene regulatory networks in hu- man and chimpanzee hippocampal intermediate pro- genitors

Sruti Patoori, Samantha M Barnada, Christopher Large, John I Murray, and Marco Trizzino. “Young transpos- able elements rewired gene regulatory networks in hu- man and chimpanzee hippocampal intermediate pro- genitors”. In: Development 149.19 (2022), dev200413

2022
[160]

Comparative single-cell tran- scriptomic analysis of primate brains highlights human- specific regulatory evolution

Hamsini Suresh, Megan Crow, Nikolas Jorstad, Re- becca Hodge, Ed Lein, Alexander Dobin, Trygve Bakken, and Jesse Gillis. “Comparative single-cell tran- scriptomic analysis of primate brains highlights human- specific regulatory evolution”. In: Nature Ecology & Evolution 7.11 (...

2023
[161]

Enhancer evolution and the origins of morphological novelty

Mark Rebeiz and Miltos Tsiantis. “Enhancer evolution and the origins of morphological novelty”. In: Cur- rent Opinion in Genetics & Development 45 (2017), pp. 115–123

2017
[162]

Point mutations in a distant sonic hedge- hog cis-regulator generate a variable regulatory out- put responsible for preaxial polydactyly

Laura A Lettice, Alison E Hill, Paul S Devenney, and Robert E Hill. “Point mutations in a distant sonic hedge- hog cis-regulator generate a variable regulatory out- put responsible for preaxial polydactyly”. In: Human molecular genetics 17.7 (2008), pp. 978–985

2008
[163]

Evolution of the vertebrate eye: opsins, photorecep- tors, retina and eye cup

Trevor D Lamb, Shaun P Collin, and Edward N Pugh. “Evolution of the vertebrate eye: opsins, photorecep- tors, retina and eye cup”. In: Nature Reviews Neuro- science 8.12 (2007), pp. 960–976

2007
[164]

The origin of the vertebrate eye

Trevor D Lamb, Edward N Pugh, and Shaun P Collin. “The origin of the vertebrate eye”. In: Evolution: Edu- cation and Outreach 1 (2008), pp. 415–426

2008
[165]

David Allis, Marie-Laure Caparros, Thomas Jenuwein, Danny Reinberg, and Monika Lachlan, eds

C. David Allis, Marie-Laure Caparros, Thomas Jenuwein, Danny Reinberg, and Monika Lachlan, eds. Epigenetics. Second Edition. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2015, p. 984. ISBN : 978-1-936113-59-0

2015
[166]

What is life?: the physical aspect of the living cell

Erwin Schrodinger. “What is life?: the physical aspect of the living cell”. In: (1946)

1946
[167]

An ab initio definition of life pertain- ing to Astrobiology

Ian von Hegner. “An ab initio definition of life pertain- ing to Astrobiology”. In: (2019). 25

2019
[168]

Ac- tive inference: the free energy principle in mind, brain, and behavior

Thomas Parr, Giovanni Pezzulo, and Karl J Friston. Ac- tive inference: the free energy principle in mind, brain, and behavior. MIT Press, 2022

2022
[169]

Life as we know it

Karl Friston. “Life as we know it”. In: Journal of the Royal Society Interface 10.86 (2013), p. 20130475

2013
[170]

A free energy principle for a particular physics

Karl Friston. “A free energy principle for a particular physics”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.10184 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[171]

The application of statis- tical physics to evolutionary biology

Guy Sella and Aaron E Hirsh. “The application of statis- tical physics to evolutionary biology”. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102.27 (2005), pp. 9541–9546

2005
[172]

Anticipatory systems

Robert Rosen. “Anticipatory systems”. In: Anticipatory systems: Philosophical, mathematical, and method- ological foundations. Springer, 2011, pp. 313–370

2011
[173]

The physical character of information

Mahesh Karnani, Kimmo P ¨a¨akk¨onen, and Arto Annila. “The physical character of information”. In: Proceed- ings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 465.2107 (2009), pp. 2155–2175

2009
[174]

A collection of defi- nitions of intelligence

Shane Legg, Marcus Hutter, et al. “A collection of defi- nitions of intelligence”. In: Frontiers in Artificial Intel- ligence and applications 157 (2007), p. 17

2007
[175]

The hard problem of consciousness

David Chalmers. “The hard problem of consciousness”. In: The Blackwell companion to consciousness (2017), pp. 32–42

2017
[176]

The evolution of the sensitive soul: Learning and the origins of con- sciousness

Simona Ginsburg and Eva Jablonka. The evolution of the sensitive soul: Learning and the origins of con- sciousness. MIT Press, 2019

2019
[177]

A mathematical theory of communication

Claude Elwood Shannon. “A mathematical theory of communication”. In: The Bell system technical journal 27.3 (1948), pp. 379–423

1948
[178]

How can evo- lution learn?

Richard A Watson and E ¨ors Szathm´ary. “How can evo- lution learn?” In: Trends in ecology & evolution 31.2 (2016), pp. 147–157

2016
[179]

What can ecosystems learn? Expanding evolutionary ecology with learning theory

Daniel A Power, Richard A Watson, E ¨ors Szathm ´ary, Rob Mills, Simon T Powers, C Patrick Doncaster, and Bła ˙Zej Czapp. “What can ecosystems learn? Expanding evolutionary ecology with learning theory”. In: Biology direct 10 (2015), pp. 1–24

2015
[180]

Bayes and Darwin: How replica- tor populations implement Bayesian computations

D ´aniel Cz ´egel, Hamza Giaffar, Joshua B Tenenbaum, and E¨ors Szathm´ary. “Bayes and Darwin: How replica- tor populations implement Bayesian computations”. In: Bioessays 44.4 (2022), p. 2100255

2022
[181]

Multilevel selection as Bayesian inference, major tran- sitions in individuality as structure learning

D ´aniel Cz ´egel, Istv ´an Zachar, and E ¨ors Szathm ´ary. “Multilevel selection as Bayesian inference, major tran- sitions in individuality as structure learning”. In: Royal Society open science 6.8 (2019), p. 190202

2019
[182]

https : / / www

The Developing Brain — ncbi.nlm.nih.gov . https : / / www . ncbi . nlm . nih . gov / books / NBK225562/. [Accessed 21-02-2025]

2025
[183]

Synaptogenesis, synapse elimi- nation, and neural plasticity in human cerebral cortex

Peter R Huttenlocher. “Synaptogenesis, synapse elimi- nation, and neural plasticity in human cerebral cortex”. In: Threats to optimal development . Routledge, 2013, pp. 35–54

2013
[184]

Neuro- genesis and hippocampal plasticity in adult brain

Yan Gu, Stephen Janoschka, and Shaoyu Ge. “Neuro- genesis and hippocampal plasticity in adult brain”. In: Neurogenesis and neural plasticity (2013), pp. 31–48

2013
[185]

In vivo imaging of dendritic pruning in dentate granule cells

J Tiago Gonc ¸alves, Cooper W Bloyd, Matthew Shtrah- man, Stephen T Johnston, Simon T Schafer, Sarah L Parylak, Thanh Tran, Tina Chang, and Fred H Gage. “In vivo imaging of dendritic pruning in dentate granule cells”. In: Nature neuroscience 19.6 (2016), pp. 788– 791

2016
[186]

Adult neuroplasticity employs developmental mechanisms

Todd M Mowery and Preston E Garraghty. “Adult neuroplasticity employs developmental mechanisms”. In: Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 16 (2023), p. 1086680

2023
[187]

Gerald M. Edelman. Neural Darwinism : the the- ory of neuronal group selection . Basic Books, 1987. ISBN : 978-0-465-04934-9. URL: http : / / www . worldcat.org/isbn/9780465049349

1987
[188]

Neural Darwinism: selection and reentrant signaling in higher brain function

Gerald M Edelman. “Neural Darwinism: selection and reentrant signaling in higher brain function”. In:Neuron 10.2 (1993), pp. 115–125

1993
[189]

The neuronal replicator hypothesis

Chrisantha Fernando, Richard Goldstein, and E ¨ors Sza- thm´ary. “The neuronal replicator hypothesis”. In: Neu- ral computation 22.11 (2010), pp. 2809–2857

2010
[190]

Neuronal boost to evolutionary dynamics

Harold P de Vladar and E ¨ors Szathm ´ary. “Neuronal boost to evolutionary dynamics”. In:Interface focus 5.6 (2015), p. 20150074

2015
[191]

Cognitive architecture with evolutionary dynamics solves insight problem

Anna Fedor, Istv ´an Zachar, Andr ´as Szil ´agyi, Michael ¨Ollinger, Harold P De Vladar, and E ¨ors Szathm ´ary. “Cognitive architecture with evolutionary dynamics solves insight problem”. In: Frontiers in psychology 8 (2017), p. 427

2017
[192]

Learning in spiking neural net- works by reinforcement of stochastic synaptic transmis- sion

H Sebastian Seung. “Learning in spiking neural net- works by reinforcement of stochastic synaptic transmis- sion”. In: Neuron 40.6 (2003), pp. 1063–1073

2003
[193]

Hebb and darwin

Paul Adams. “Hebb and darwin”. In: Journal of theo- retical Biology 195.4 (1998), pp. 419–438

1998
[194]

A theory of the epigenesis of neuronal net- works by selective stabilization of synapses

Jean-Pierre Changeux, Philippe Courr `ege, and Antoine Danchin. “A theory of the epigenesis of neuronal net- works by selective stabilization of synapses”. In: Pro- ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 70.10 (1973), pp. 2974–2978

1973
[195]

Synaptic theory of replicator- like melioration

Yonatan Loewenstein. “Synaptic theory of replicator- like melioration”. In: Frontiers in computational neu- roscience 4 (2010), p. 1722

2010
[196]

The brain as a Darwin machine

William H Calvin. “The brain as a Darwin machine”. In: Nature 330.6143 (1987), pp. 33–34

1987
[197]

The cerebral code: Thinking a thought in the mosaics of the mind

William H Calvin. The cerebral code: Thinking a thought in the mosaics of the mind. Mit Press, 1998

1998
[198]

Selectionist and evolutionary approaches to brain function: a critical appraisal

Chrisantha Fernando, E ¨ors Szathm ´ary, and Phil Hus- bands. “Selectionist and evolutionary approaches to brain function: a critical appraisal”. In: Frontiers in computational neuroscience 6 (2012), p. 24. 26

2012
[199]

Selective at- tention

William A Johnston and Veronica J Dark. “Selective at- tention.” In: Annual review of psychology (1986)

1986
[200]

Sutton and Andrew G

Richard S. Sutton and Andrew G. Barto. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction . Second. The MIT Press,
[201]

Learning through re- inforcement and replicator dynamics

Tilman B ¨orgers and Rajiv Sarin. “Learning through re- inforcement and replicator dynamics”. In: Journal of economic theory 77.1 (1997), pp. 1–14

1997
[202]

Evolution and the Theory of Games

John Maynard Smith. Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1982

1982
[203]

Adaptive evolution on neutral net- works

Claus O Wilke. “Adaptive evolution on neutral net- works”. In: Bulletin of mathematical biology 63.4 (2001), pp. 715–730

2001
[204]

The impact of neu- tral mutations on genome evolvability

Olivier Tenaillon and Ivan Matic. “The impact of neu- tral mutations on genome evolvability”. In: Current Bi- ology 30.10 (2020), R527–R534

2020
[205]

The origins of evolutionary innova- tions: a theory of transformative change in living sys- tems

Andreas Wagner. The origins of evolutionary innova- tions: a theory of transformative change in living sys- tems. OUP Oxford, 2011

2011
[206]

Modularity in development and why it matters to evo-devo

Jessica A Bolker. “Modularity in development and why it matters to evo-devo”. In: American Zoologist 40.5 (2000), pp. 770–776

2000
[207]

Duplication and diver- gence: the evolution of new genes and old ideas

John S Taylor and Jeroen Raes. “Duplication and diver- gence: the evolution of new genes and old ideas”. In: Annu. Rev. Genet. 38.1 (2004), pp. 615–643

2004
[208]

Evolution of new enzymes by gene duplication and divergence

Shelley D Copley. “Evolution of new enzymes by gene duplication and divergence”. In: The FEBS journal 287.7 (2020), pp. 1262–1283

2020
[209]

Limbs and tail as evolutionarily diverging duplicates of the main body axis

Alessandro Minelli. “Limbs and tail as evolutionarily diverging duplicates of the main body axis”. In: Evolu- tion & development 2.3 (2000), pp. 157–165

2000
[210]

Modelleyen: Con- tinual Learning and Planning via Structured Modelling of Environment Dynamics

Zeki Doruk Erden and Boi Faltings. “Modelleyen: Con- tinual Learning and Planning via Structured Modelling of Environment Dynamics”. In:Brain Informatics: 17th International Conference, BI 2024, Bangkok, Thailand, December 13–15, 2024, Proceedings . Ed. by Sirawaj Itthipuripat...

2024
[211]

Agential AI for Integrated Continual Learning, Deliberative Behavior, and Comprehensible Models (Extended Abstract)

Zeki Doruk Erden and Boi Faltings. “Agential AI for Integrated Continual Learning, Deliberative Behavior, and Comprehensible Models (Extended Abstract)”. In: Proceedings of 24th International Conference on Au- tonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS). To appear. May 2025

2025
[212]

Agential AI for Integrated Continual Learning, Deliberative Behavior, and Comprehensible Models

Zeki Doruk Erden and Boi Faltings. Agential AI for Integrated Continual Learning, Deliberative Behavior, and Comprehensible Models . 2025. arXiv: 2501 . 16922 [cs.AI] . URL: https : / / arxiv . org / abs/2501.16922

2025 arXiv
[213]

Continually Learn- ing Structured Visual Representations via Network Re- finement with Rerelation

Zeki Doruk Erden and Boi Faltings. Continually Learn- ing Structured Visual Representations via Network Re- finement with Rerelation. 2025. arXiv: 2502.13935 [cs.CV]. URL: https : / / arxiv . org / abs / 2502.13935

2025
[214]

Rethinking spiking neural networks as state space models

Malyaban Bal and Abhronil Sengupta. “Rethinking spiking neural networks as state space models”. In: arXiv e-prints (2024), arXiv–2406

2024
[215]

Alternative for- mulations of multilevel selection

John Damuth and I Lorraine Heisler. “Alternative for- mulations of multilevel selection”. In: Biology and Phi- losophy 3 (1988), pp. 407–430

1988
[216]

Multilevel Selection and the Major Transitions in Evolution

Samir Okasha. “Multilevel Selection and the Major Transitions in Evolution”. In: Philosophy of Science 72.5 (2005), pp. 1013–1025.DOI: 10.1086/508102

2005 doi
[217]

The genetical theory of multilevel selec- tion

A. Gardner. “The genetical theory of multilevel selec- tion”. In: Journal of Evolutionary Biology 28.2 (2015), pp. 305–319. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ jeb.12566. eprint: https://onlinelibrary. wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/jeb.12566 . URL: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/a...

2015 doi
[218]

Hierarchi- cal reinforcement learning based on subgoal discov- ery and subpolicy specialization

Bram Bakker, J ¨urgen Schmidhuber, et al. “Hierarchi- cal reinforcement learning based on subgoal discov- ery and subpolicy specialization”. In: Proc. of the 8- th Conf. on Intelligent Autonomous Systems . Citeseer. 2004, pp. 438–445

2004
[219]

Sub-policy adaptation for hier- archical reinforcement learning

Alexander C Li, Carlos Florensa, Ignasi Clavera, and Pieter Abbeel. “Sub-policy adaptation for hier- archical reinforcement learning”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.05862 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[220]

Ac- tive exploration deep reinforcement learning for contin- uous action space with forward prediction

Dongfang Zhao, Xu Huanshi, and Zhang Xun. “Ac- tive exploration deep reinforcement learning for contin- uous action space with forward prediction”. In: Inter- national Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems 17.1 (2024), p. 6

2024
[221]

Uncertainty-Guided Active Reinforcement Learning with Bayesian Neural Networks

Xinyang Wu, Mohamed El-Shamouty, Christof Nitsche, and Marco F Huber. “Uncertainty-Guided Active Reinforcement Learning with Bayesian Neural Networks”. In: 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) . IEEE. 2023, pp. 5751–5757

2023
[222]

Knowledge-guided exploration in deep reinforcement learning

Sahisnu Mazumder, Bing Liu, Shuai Wang, Yingx- uan Zhu, Xiaotian Yin, Lifeng Liu, and Jian Li. “Knowledge-guided exploration in deep reinforcement learning”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.15670 (2022)

2022 arXiv
[223]

Learning in nonstationary environments: A survey

Gregory Ditzler, Manuel Roveri, Cesare Alippi, and Robi Polikar. “Learning in nonstationary environments: A survey”. In: IEEE Computational Intelligence Maga- zine 10.4 (2015), pp. 12–25

2015
[224]

Trustworthy artificial intelligence: a review

Davinder Kaur, Suleyman Uslu, Kaley J Rittichier, and Arjan Durresi. “Trustworthy artificial intelligence: a review”. In: ACM computing surveys (CSUR) 55.2 (2022), pp. 1–38. 27

2022
[225]

An overview of models of tech- nological singularity

Anders Sandberg. “An overview of models of tech- nological singularity”. In: The transhumanist reader: Classical and contemporary essays on the science, tech- nology, and philosophy of the human future (2013), pp. 376–394

2013
[226]

Evo devo universe? A framework for speculations on cosmic culture

John M Smart. Evo devo universe? A framework for speculations on cosmic culture. na, 2008

2008
[227]

How i learned to stop worrying and love the imminent internet singularity

Gary William Flake. “How i learned to stop worrying and love the imminent internet singularity”. In: Pro- ceedings of the 15th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management. 2006, pp. 2– 2

2006
[228]

Speculations concerning the first ultraintelligent machine

Irving John Good. “Speculations concerning the first ultraintelligent machine”. In: Advances in computers . V ol. 6. Elsevier, 1966, pp. 31–88

1966
[229]

Coming Technological Singularity: How to Survive in the Post-Human Era

Vernor Vinge. “Coming Technological Singularity: How to Survive in the Post-Human Era”. In: Vision-21: Interdisciplinary Science and Engineering in the Era of Cyberspace (1993)

1993
[230]

Economics of the singularity

Robin Hanson. “Economics of the singularity”. In: iEEE SpEctrum 45.6 (2008), pp. 45–50

2008
[231]

Accelerating socio-technological evolution: from ephemeralization and stigmergy to the global brain

Francis Heylighen. “Accelerating socio-technological evolution: from ephemeralization and stigmergy to the global brain”. In: Globalization as evolutionary pro- cess. Routledge, 2007, pp. 304–329

2007
[232]

Finite-time sin- gularity in the dynamics of the world population, eco- nomic and financial indices

Anders Johansen and Didier Sornette. “Finite-time sin- gularity in the dynamics of the world population, eco- nomic and financial indices”. In: Physica A: Statis- tical Mechanics and its Applications 294.3-4 (2001), pp. 465–502

2001
[233]

The industrial revolution: Past and future

Robert E Lucas et al. “The industrial revolution: Past and future”. In: Lectures on economic growth 109 (2002), p. 188

2002
[234]

The mathemat- ical structure of innovation

Thomas Fink and Ali Teimouri. “The mathemat- ical structure of innovation”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.03281 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[235]

Technological innova- tion as an evolutionary process

John M Ziman and John Ziman. Technological innova- tion as an evolutionary process. Cambridge University Press, 2003

2003
[236]

A theory of classification and evolu- tion of technologies within a Generalised Darwinism

Mario Coccia. “A theory of classification and evolu- tion of technologies within a Generalised Darwinism”. In: Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 31.5 (2019), pp. 517–531

2019
[237]

Recombinant growth

Martin L Weitzman. “Recombinant growth”. In: The Quarterly Journal of Economics113.2 (1998), pp. 331– 360

1998
[238]

The relationship between science and technology

Harvey Brooks. “The relationship between science and technology”. In: Research policy 23.5 (1994), pp. 477– 486

1994
[239]

How Knowledge Recombination Fuels Techno- logical Innovation? Insights from IPC Co-occurrence Networks

Ziyue Xie, Keye Wu, Jia Tina Du, Yunhao Xie, and Ya Chen. “How Knowledge Recombination Fuels Techno- logical Innovation? Insights from IPC Co-occurrence Networks”. In: International Conference on Asian Dig- ital Libraries. Springer. 2025, pp. 19–38

2025
[240]

Technology and the spread of capitalism

Kristine Bruland, David C Mowery, and JG Williamson. Technology and the spread of capitalism . Cambridge University Press, 2014

2014
[241]

Progressivism

Daniel Tr ¨ohler. “Progressivism”. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. 2017

2017
[242]

The political background of a pattern transformation in the Chinese system of science and technology during the 20th century

Guangbi Dong. “The political background of a pattern transformation in the Chinese system of science and technology during the 20th century”. In:Cultures of Sci- ence 5.1 (2022), pp. 16–32

2022
[243]

Modernization, science and engineer- ing in the early nineteenth century Ottoman Empire

Berrak Burc ¸ak. “Modernization, science and engineer- ing in the early nineteenth century Ottoman Empire”. In: Middle Eastern Studies 44.1 (2008), pp. 69–83

2008
[244]

Engines of creation 2.0

K Eric Drexler. “Engines of creation 2.0”. In: The Com- ing Era of Nanotechnology. Twentieth Anniversary Edi- tion. Updated and Expanded. WOWIO LLC (2006)

2006
[245]

Recursive Self- Improvement - LessWrong — lesswrong.com

Alex Altair, joaolkf, and Kaj Sotala. Recursive Self- Improvement - LessWrong — lesswrong.com. https: / / www . lesswrong . com / w / recursive - self-improvement. [Accessed 19-02-2025]

2025
[246]

https://builtin.com/ artificial - intelligence / artificial - intelligence-future

The Future of AI: How AI Is Changing the World — Built In — builtin.com . https://builtin.com/ artificial - intelligence / artificial - intelligence-future. [Accessed 21-02-2025]

2025
[247]

Is Artificial Intelligence the Future of Every- day Life? — drishtisethi8

Drishti. Is Artificial Intelligence the Future of Every- day Life? — drishtisethi8 . https : / / medium . com / @drishtisethi8 / is - artificial - intelligence-the-future-of-everyday- life-8e62f3923b63. [Accessed 21-02-2025]

2025
[248]

The Impact of Artificial Intel- ligence on everyday Life — indiastemfoundation.org

India STEM Foundation. The Impact of Artificial Intel- ligence on everyday Life — indiastemfoundation.org . https : / / indiastemfoundation . org / blog/impact-ai-life/. [Accessed 21-02-2025]

2025
[249]

Debates on the nature of artificial general intelligence

Melanie Mitchell. Debates on the nature of artificial general intelligence. 2024

2024
[250]

Technological singularity: What do we really know?

Alexey Potapov. “Technological singularity: What do we really know?” In: Information 9.4 (2018), p. 82

2018
[251]

An introduction to niche construction theory

Kevin Laland, Blake Matthews, and Marcus W Feld- man. “An introduction to niche construction theory”. In: Evolutionary ecology 30 (2016), pp. 191–202

2016
[252]

Marginalia: 1798: Darwin and Malthus

Keith Stewart Thomson. “Marginalia: 1798: Darwin and Malthus”. In: American scientist 86.3 (1998), pp. 226–229

1998
[253]

Artificial intelligence- enhanced quantum chemical method with broad ap- plicability

Peikun Zheng, Roman Zubatyuk, Wei Wu, Olexandr Isayev, and Pavlo O Dral. “Artificial intelligence- enhanced quantum chemical method with broad ap- plicability”. In: Nature communications 12.1 (2021), p. 7022

2021
[254]

Highly accurate protein structure pre- diction with AlphaFold

John Jumper, Richard Evans, Alexander Pritzel, Tim Green, Michael Figurnov, Olaf Ronneberger, Kathryn Tunyasuvunakool, Russ Bates, Augustin ˇZ´ıdek, Anna Potapenko, et al. “Highly accurate protein structure pre- diction with AlphaFold”. In: nature 596.7873 (2021), pp. 583–589. 28

2021
[255]

https : / / www

Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2024 — nobelprize.org . https : / / www . nobelprize . org / prizes / chemistry/2024/press-release/. [Accessed 19-02-2025]

2024
[256]

The expansion of doctoral educa- tion and the changing nature and purpose of the doctor- ate

Cl ´audia S Sarrico. “The expansion of doctoral educa- tion and the changing nature and purpose of the doctor- ate”. In: Higher Education 84.6 (2022), pp. 1299–1315

2022
[257]

Ai align- ment: A comprehensive survey

Jiaming Ji, Tianyi Qiu, Boyuan Chen, Borong Zhang, Hantao Lou, Kaile Wang, Yawen Duan, Zhonghao He, Jiayi Zhou, Zhaowei Zhang, et al. “Ai align- ment: A comprehensive survey”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.19852 (2023). 29

2023 arXiv
[373]

DOI: https : / / doi

ISBN : 978-0-12-812537-3. DOI: https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1016 / B978 - 0 - 12 - 812537 - 3 . 00012 - 3. URL: https : / / www . sciencedirect . com / science / article / pii/B9780128125373000123
[400]

DOI: https : / / doi

ISBN : 978-0-12-384720-1. DOI: https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1016 / B978 - 0 - 12 - 384719 - 5 . 00048 - 4. URL: https : / / www . sciencedirect . com / science / article / pii/B9780123847195000484
[2018]

net / book/the-book-2nd.html

URL: http : / / incompleteideas . net / book/the-book-2nd.html

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

https : / / www

Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Manufacturing Mar- ket Report By 2034 — precedenceresearch.com . https : / / www . precedenceresearch . com / artificial - intelligence - in - manufacturing-market. [Accessed 20-02-2025]

2025

[2] [2]

AI adoption in America: Who, what, and where

Kristina McElheran, J Frank Li, Erik Brynjolfsson, Zachary Kroff, Emin Dinlersoz, Lucia Foster, and Niko- las Zolas. “AI adoption in America: Who, what, and where”. In: Journal of Economics & Management Strat- egy 33.2 (2024), pp. 375–415

2024

[3] [3]

https : / / springsapps

Large Language Model Statistics And Numbers (2025) - Springs — springsapps.com . https : / / springsapps . com / knowledge / large - language - model - statistics - and - numbers-2024. [Accessed 20-02-2025]

2025

[4] [4]

https : / / aiindex

AI Index Report 2024 Artificial Intelligence Index — aiindex.stanford.edu . https : / / aiindex . stanford.edu/report/. [Accessed 20-02-2025]

2024

[5] [5]

The structure of scientific revolutions

Thomas S Kuhn. The structure of scientific revolutions. V ol. 962. University of Chicago press Chicago, 1997

1997

[6] [6]

Deep learning

Yoshua Bengio, Ian Goodfellow, and Aaron Courville. Deep learning . V ol. 1. MIT press Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017

2017

[7] [7]

An introduction to neural networks

Kevin Gurney. An introduction to neural networks . CRC press, 2018

2018

[8] [8]

Con- nectionism, Complexity, and Living Systems: a compar- ison of Artificial and Biological Neural Networks

Krishna Katyal, Jesse Parent, and Bradly Alicea. Con- nectionism, Complexity, and Living Systems: a compar- ison of Artificial and Biological Neural Networks. 2021. arXiv: 2103 . 15553 [cs.NE]. URL: https : / / arxiv.org/abs/2103.15553

arXiv 2021