Hrant
            Dink Hrant Dink has been murdered in front of the offices of the newspaper which he edited. The man who killed him shouted "I've killed the Armenian!" after he shot him. Dink was a brave man, he was a good man, and he was killed just because he was an Armenian who dared to speak out. He wrote about the death threats he received, but nobody cared; we watched him get killed. Now we swear not to forget. Can we not forget? Will it make a difference that we remember him with a shy smile on his face, and shed a few tears every now and then? I want to believe it does.



Hi there, this is Ulas's web page (the name is pronounced like this: Ooh - lush , but try to make the "Ooh" part short).
I 'm currently working on my PhD at the University of Osnabrueck in Germany, at the Graduate School Rules and Patterns.

The origins of symbol use and communication in preverbal categorization: A situated perspective


This is a continuation of my thesis, which you can read here. And the original proposal is over here. There's even a CV, for those of you who would like to offer me my dream job. After I finish my PhD, of course.

The thesis is supervised by Prof. Kai-Uwe Kuehnberger, and I've been working closely with Roul S. John. Both are great guys, so don't hesitate to click on the links. They even have photos on their websites. Roul also has some cool things he has written on his website, most of which I agree with scientifically. Unfortunately it's in German.

What I want to do is model symbol use and generation with embodied agents.
Why symbols? Because you don't have sophisticated (i.e. human level) intelligence without them, it seems, and I believe that symbols and symbolic behavior don't come out from the blue. They should be modelled just like any other kind of behavior.

Why embodied agents? First of all, I take embodied to mean something very simple: physical, i.e. robotic. There are a number of reasons for prefering robots, but the following two are the most important, in my humble opinion:
  1. Practical: They force one to take into account motoric and sensory aspects of intelligence
  2. Theoretical: Embodied experience provides the common context in which all content can be grounded. (Stated crudely here. If you want to have a better idea, have a look at Richard Dreyfus' work).
For the details see my thesis and proposal; they have a lot more to offer.

Publications

  • Türkmen, U. and Zugic, R. (2008)). Modelling the social coordiantion of behavior with public symbols. In Bullock, S., Noble, J., Watson, R., and Bedau, M.A., editors, Artificial Life XI: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on the Simulation and Synthesis of Living Systems, page 812. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Türkmen, U. (2007a). Situated representations and the modelling of the evolution of language. In Frings, C., Mecklinger, A., Opitz, B., Pospeschill, M., Wentura, D., and Zimmer, H. D., editors, Kognitionsforschung 2007: Beiträge zur 8. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Kognitionswissenschaft, Aachen. Shaker Verlag.
  • John, R. S., Türkmen, U., Zugic, R., and Werner, C. W. (2007). Alife and pecking: Applying the comparative cognitive robotics framework to chicken intelligence. Submitted to ECAL2007, 9th European Conference on Artificial Life.
  • John, R. S., Türkmen, U., and Zugic, R. (2006). Comparative cognitive robotics: Autonomous robots as empirical models of animal learning. In Payette, N. and Hardy-Vallée, B., editors, Proceedings of Cognitio 2006: Beyond the brain: embodied, situated & distributed cognition.
  • John, R. S., Werner, C. W., and Türkmen, U. (2005). Implementation of an empirical robot model of discrimination learning. In Opwis, K. and Penner, I.-K., editors, Proceedings of KogWis05: The German Cognitive Science Conference 2005, Basel. Schwabe Verlag.

Other stuff

I helped a friend of mine get his start-up going, check it out here: Lijit