A General Black Box Theory

Author(s): Mario Bunge

Source: Philosophy of Science, Vol. 30, No. 4 (Oct., 1963), pp. 346-358
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Philosophy of Science Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/186066 .
Accessed: 20/11/2014 14:45

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press and Philosophy of Science Association are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy of Science.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 A GENERAL BLACK BOX THEORY*

MARIO BUNGE
Physics Department, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pa.

A mathematical theory is proposed and exemplified, which covers an extended class

of black boxes. Every kind of stimulus and response is pictured by a channel connecting
the box with its environment. The input-output relation is given by a postulate schema
according to which the response is, in general, a nonlinear functional of the input.
Several examples are worked out: the perfectly transmitting box, the damping box, and
the amplifying box. The theory is shown to be (a) an extension of the S-matrix theory
and the accompanying channel picture as developed in microphysics; (b) abstract and
applicable to any problem involving the transactions of a system (physical, biological,
social, etc.) with its milieu; (c) superficial, because unconcerned with either the structure
of the box or the nature of the stimuli and responses. The motive for building the theory
was to show the capabilities and limitations of the phenomenological approach.

A black box is a fiction representinga set of concrete systems into which stimuli S
impinge and out of which reactions R emerge. The constitutionand structureof the
box are altogether irrelevant to the approachunder consideration,which is purely
external or phenomenological.In other words, only the behavior of the system will
be accountedfor.
The various kinds of stimuli and responses will be pictured as so many
channels C along which signals travel.' A channel, then, is assigned to each class of
stimuli or responses, regardless of the intervening organs or mechanisms-the
investigation of which is left to nonphenomenological,or representationaltheories.
The number of gates of the same kind will be irrelevant to the present approach:

FIG. I
* Received, February 1962.
1 The channel picture has been taken over from the kinetic theory of nuclear reactions.
See John M. Blatt and Victor F. Weisskopf, Theoretical Nuclear Physics (New York: Wiley,
1952), pp. 313 and 517 ff.
346

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 A GENERAL BLACK BOX THEORY 347

thus a transformer-a four-terminal box-will count as a single channel box(see Fig. 1),
since both the stimuli and the responses at the terminals are electrical. In a two-
channel box one of the channels may specialize, say, in pressure inputs and outputs,
whereas the other channel may specialize in thermal stimuli and responses.
Since the aim is to relate stimuli to responses without regard to the parts or organs
of the system, the adequate mathematical tool will be integral relations rather than
differential equations. In other words, a CCnonlocal"theory seems to be called for if
the box is regarded as a unit rather than as a system of interdependent parts.
The theory will first be developed for the single channel box and will then be
extended to the multiple channel box.

1. Single Channel Box. The simplest black box reacts to stimuli of a single kind
with responses of the same kind: in our picture it has a single channel C even though
the corresponding concrete system itself may have several gates or terminals. We shall
assume that the intensity R(t) of the output at time t is determined by the intensity
of the input S at times u prior to and up to u - r, and that the form of the dependence
is

[1] R(t) f 0 du M(t, u)F[S(u -)],

where u is the integration variable and -r the time delay (reaction time) of the box
for the given channel. For many purposes (e.g., particle scattering), r 0. The
functions M and F, which may be real or complex, sum up the global properties of
the box. Notice that the response is not, in general, a function but a functional of the
stimulus; moreover, R need not be a linear functional of S, so that [1] covers both
linear and nonlinear systems. The instantaneous response of the box to a stimulus is a
function of its entire history, unless M (the memory or heredity function) vanishes for
certain past intervals. If either S or M is a random variable, R will be a random variable
as well.
The postulate schema [1] is broad enough to account for any kind of box and
stimulus. Three main sets of problems can be approached with the help of [1]:
(1) The problem of prediction: given the kind of box (i.e., given the functions M and
F) and the stimulus S, find the response R.
(2) The inverse problem of prediction: given the kind of box (M and F) and the
response R, find the stimulus S responsible for the known behavior. Notice that,
contrary to the corresponding situation in systems described by means of differential
equations, here we have, in general, no symmetry between prediction and retrodiction,
since an infinity of past histories may end up in the final state R(t).
(3) The problem of explanation: given the behavior (R) under a known stimulation
(S), find the kind of box (i.e., determine M and F) that will account for that behavior.
In general, problems (2) and (3) are not well-determined, i.e., they have no unique
solutions. They become well-determined if it is further assumed that the hereditary
function M is invariant under time displacements (i.e., is a function of the time
differences u - t alone) and is extended to a limited past (i.e., vanishes before a given
instant). This wide class of problems is dealt with in Appendix I.
We shall illustrate the postulate schema [1] with the cases of the perfect transmitter,
the damping box, and the amplifying box. In each case we shall distinguish three
kinds of typical stimuli:

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
348 MARIO BUNGE

(a) S is constantover the time interval[0, T] and zero elsewhere,i.e.,

= const. if u E [0,
[2] S(u) T];
o ~~otherwise.
(b) S acts only at time to, i.e.,
[3] F[S(u)] - F(S) 8(u-to),
- to [0, T],
where W'denotes Dirac's singular"function",the most importantpropertyof which is
T
[4] f duf(u) 8(u - to) = f(to), to c [0, T]
o

for an arbitraryfunctionf(u).
(c) S is a periodic function, in particular
= SF(S) cos wu, u > 0;
[5] F[S(u)]
[5] F[S(u)] 0 otherwise.
Let us now specify the heredity or memory function M, without however making
any assumptionregardingthe mechanismresponsiblefor M.
1.1. PerfectlyTransmittingBox. This box neither distorts nor improvesqualitatively
the informationit receives: it just converts the inputs into outputs of the same form,
though in general of different intensities and duration. That is, M does not depend
upon time. Hence our postulateschema [1] becomes

[6] R(t) M J duF[S(u-)].

0

S ~~~~~~

I R

I -I _I2

FIG. 2

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 A GENERAL BLACK BOX THEORY 349

(a) Constantstimulus
Recalling[2], we see that the effective stimulus, i.e., the retardedinput, is
(0, u < T
[7] S(u-)z)= S =const., Ir u T+T
tO, u>T+-r
In fact, (u - r) E (0, T) is equivalentto u E [r, X + T]. Hence, the responseis

[8]
[8] R(t)-= M
R(t)== M JT+T
F(S )du
TMTF(S), t E [r, - + T];
0u otherwise.
That is, the output is constantover the interval T regardlessof the time elapsedsince
the applicationof the stimulus; and the response is delayed both in the beginning
and in the end (see Fig. 2).
In particular,if
[91 F(S) =- S2,

we get
[10] R _ kSP, with k = MT.
Consequently, the psychophysical law fits -the model of the perfectly transmitting
box subject to constant stimuli.
(b) SuddenStimulus
According to [3], the effective stimulus is now
[11] F[S(u - r)] F(S) 8(u - - to).

sIR

O to to + Z
FIG. 3

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
350 MARIO BUNGE

Using [4] we obtain

[12] R(t) = ME(S)fJo duS8(u - - - to) - M() >r1t0>O

0 otherwise.

That is, the response to an instantaneousinput is time-independent; moreover, it

does not cease while the box lasts. (The problem of the energy supply for such a
continued responseis, of course, beyond the scope of our approach.)
(c) Periodic Stimulus
Recalling [5], the retardedstimulus is

[13] F[S(u -T)] = F(S) cos c(u - r), t > r > 0;

Hence,

M S) ducos co(u -T) - MF(S) [sinCoT

[14] R(t) MF= +sin o(t-T)] if t > T.

So j [R~~~~~~~~
z 7Jo \ Ct

FIG. 4

If the reactiontime is zero, the bracketreduces to sin ct; the only differencebetween
the stimulus and the responseis then, apartfrom the intensity, a 90? shift. In any case,
the output is periodic with the same period as the input.
1.2. DampingBox. The reaction capacity of this box deteriorateswith time in an
exponential form:
[15] M(t, u) = M. exp [- k(t - u)], M = const., u < t,
where k' is the relaxationtime. The responseis then

[16] R(t) = M { du e-(t-u)F[S(u -T)].

0

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 A GENERAL BLACK BOX THEORY 351

(a) ConstantStimulus
In view of [7], the responseis

[17] R(t) = MF(S) f du e-k(t-u) ekr(ekT e-kt for t > T.

T ~~~~k

S iR

__ _. I\ ____ _ S

0 ~~~~~~~~T IS

FIG. 5

After a long enough time (t > T), the responsebecomesnegligible.But, if the stimulus
is kept up to the observationtime t, i.e., if T= t, we have the case of stimulus reinfor-
cement and the responseincreasessteadily in accordancewith

[18] R(t) ==ME(S)

k ekTr(
- ekt)

Incidentally,this is Hull's function, well known to psychologists. In words: constant

stimulation can make up for defective memory. The asymptotic value of [18] is
[19] R(oo) == MF(S) ek?/lk = const.
(b) Sudden Stimulus
Taking [3] and [16] into consideration,the response is
R(t) M(S) fdu ek(t-u) (u- to)
[20] ME(S)
MF eW-r-to), t > T + to > 0;
0 otherwise.
The response to a sudden stimulus decays exponentiallyand dies out completely after
an infinite lapse.

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
352 MARIO BUNGE

(c) PeriodicStimulus
In view of [5] and [16],

R(t) = MF(S) du e-k(t-u) cos w0(u-)

[211 ?M(S)
+ c sin c(t-r) c sin
k2] & + , [k cos c(t-r) - (k cos ci-- w) e kt].

The response, too, is a periodic function with the same period as the stimulus, only
with an exponentiallydecreasing amplitude. Notice that, for k = 0, [21] reduces to
[13].
1.3. AmplifyingBox. Suppose our black box amplifies stimuli in accordance with
the law
[22] M(t, u) = M[1 - e-k(t1U)], M = const., u < t.
The response will then be

[23] R(t) = M f du[1- e-k(t-u)] F[S(u -T)]

0

(a) ConstantStimulus
Inserting [2] in [23], we get
-rT
R(t) MF(S) du[1 e-k(t-u)]

[24] MF(S)
- k [kT -(eT -1)ek(t?)], t > T.

FIG. 6

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 A GENERAL BLACK BOX THEORY 353

For either very small excitation periods or very rapidly amplifying boxes,
ekT- 1 - kT, and

[25] R(t) M (S) [I - e-k(tT)

T [
If the stimulus is reinforcedup to the observationtime (t = T),

[26] R(t) -= MF(S) [kt - ek(l - e-kt)].

k
For large observation periods the bracket approaches the straight line kt - ekr.
That is, the behaviorof the box tends to become linear.
(b) SuddenStimulus

R(t) = MF(S) j du[1 - ek(t-u)] S3(u- -to)

[273 -
ME(S) [10- ek(T+to) e-kt], t > to + T.

The amplifyingbox subjectedto an impulsivestimulus behaves,then, like the damping

box subjected to constant reinforcement(cf. [18]).
(c) Periodic Stimulus
g
R(t) = MF(S) f du[l - e-kt-t')] cos w(u - T)

[28] = MF(S) | [sin wi + sin (t -r)] -, k2 + [k cos w(t- T)

+ sin co(t - T) -(k cos COT- J sin wT) e-kt

The periodof the output is, again, the same as that of the input.

2. Multiple Channel Box. A box with two channels has the following four
(mutually compatible) possibilities of behavior:
SI Rl, SI R2
S2 R1, S2 R2.

In general,a box with N channelswill be able to make N2 possible transitions,which

may convenientlybe orderedin a squarematrix [Sm--* Rn]. This matrixhas in general
no simple structure.Thus, it need not be symmetric,since reversibilityis an exception,
and it need not be unitaryeither, since there need not be conservationof the incoming
stimulus: the box will in general either absorb or dissipate some informationand/or
energy through some channels. In a general black box theory the scatteringmatrix
(as it is called in physics) is then much more complicated than in the case, say, of
"celementary"particle collision, where reciprocity (reversibility)ensures the matrix
symmetry, and flux conservationcorrespondsto unitarity.
Still, it may be advantageousto retain part of the vocabularycoined in the field
of the scattering matrix theory, or S-matrix theory for short.2 Thus the diagonal
2 See, e.g., N. N. Bogoliubov and D. V. Shirkov, Introduction to the Theory of Quantized
Fields (New York: Interscience Publishers, Inc., 1959), pp. 197 ff.

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
354 MARIO BUNGE

element S. -* Rn of our generalized scattering matrix may be called the reflection

coefficient of the n-th channel. And the off-diagonalterm Sm-* R, of the scattering
matrix may be called the transmissioncoefficient from channel Cminto channel Cn.

St
C S

RI
S2
Ca

FIG. 7

Furthermore,if the black box is statistical,the elements of the scattering matrix will
be related to the transitionprobabilitiesor, rather,to the probabilitiesfor the conver-
sion of inputs of given kinds into outputs of other given kinds. In short, our theory
is a generalizationof the S-matrix theory; this will emergemore clearlyin AppendixI.
We will generalize the postulate schema [1] by assuming that the m-th response
Rm(t) at time t depends on a linear combination of the various inputs, in the form

[29] Rm(t) = 0 du EMmn(t, u) F.[S.(u -T)]

where CMmn' designates the memory function associated with the m -* n transition;
in particular,Mmmis the memory of the box for the m-th class of stimuli. In general,
the matrix [Mmn]will not be symmetric. The contributionsFn[Sn]of the various
kinds of stimuli are, in general, differentfrom one another, and every channel has its
own delay constant.
We shall specify this postulate schema for the cases treated above, correspondingly
generalized:
(a) each Sn acts constantlyduring a time interval T,;
(b)each Sn acts suddenly at a particulartime tn;
(c) each Sn,acts periodicallywith a frequencyco, and a phase0n of its own. That is,
(a) ConstantStimuli

[30] n(
S.(u) 0:S,l = const.ifueT,
otherwise.
(b) SuddenStimuli
[31] FP[S,(u)] Fn(Sn) 3(u - tn), tn E [0, t].

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 A GENERAL BLACK BOX THEORY 355

(c) PeriodicStimuli
[32] F.[S.(u)] = F.[S.] cos(wnu + u > 0.

2.1. Perfectly TransmittingBox. The memory matrix is time-independent:

Mmn(t, u) Mmn const.
(a) ConstantStimuli

[33] Rm(t) MmnFn(Sn) T, t e [I) n+ T.

By introducingthe column matrices

R, ~ ~ [F1T1
R2 F2T2
[34] R= F| S

_RN __FN TN
the N relations [33] are abreviatedto
[35] R = MS,
where 'M' designates the memory matrix, or scatteringmatrix. The time-indepen-
dence of the over-all process is reflectedin the time-independenceof M.
(b) SuddenStimuli
N
[36] Rm(t) = InMmnFn(Sn), t > Tn + tn
1

In matrix form we write again R = MS, where now and in the following

-Fl(Sl)
F2(S2)
[37] S=

LFN(SN)
(c) PeriodicStimuli

[38] Rm(t) = M F( {sin (cwn-rT+ i) + sin [cn(t - -T,) + n]},

for t > Max (Tn).

2.2. Damping Box. Let the memory matrix elements be

[39] Mmn(t, u) M mne-kmn(t-u), Mmn = const., u < t,
where k-J1 is the relaxation time for the m -* n "reflection".

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
356 MARIO BUNGE

(a) ConstantStimuli

[40] Rm(t) mk ( ) nTn(e mnT 1 e-kmnt

1 mn

For t > Max(TJ), the response is negligible. But if all stimuli are kept up to the
observation time (i.e., if t Tn), the scattering matrix elements become proportional
to 1 - e-mnt and the response tends asymptotically to a constant column matrix.
(b) SuddenStimuli
N
[41] Rm(t) = I MmnFn(Sn) e-kmn(tTt_), t > tn + Tn.

(c) PeriodicStimuli
N M Fn(S'1
[42] Rm(t) = jkk2+ .;I {kmn[cos(wnt + w,nTn- ?n) - cos (-cn n)]
1 mn n
+ cajsin (cont - conTn + qn) + sin (nTn -n)]}

2.3. Amplifying Box. Let the memory matrix elements be

[43] Mmn(t, u) = Mmn[l - ekmn(tu)].

(a) ConstantStimuli

[44] Rm(t) N ! Fn(Sn) [kmnTn- (ekmnTn-1) ekmn(t )]

kmn

If the stimuli are all reinforced up to the observation time t,

[45] Rm~(t) Xn kmn

mn [kmt - ekmnt,Tn(1 + e-kmn,t)] F (S )
With increasing time the individual contributions of the various stimuli tend to become
linear:
N
[46] Rm(t) s 1 MmnFn(Sn) t

Incidentally, the growing automaton fits this schema.

(b) SuddenStimuli
N

[47] Rm(t) n Mmn[ + e mn(rn+tn)

ekmnt] Fn(sn).

(c) PeriodicStimuli
N
[48] Rm(t) = In Mmn [sin (wnTn + k.) + sin (wnt - WnTn+ jn)]
1

-- k I 2- [kmn cos (cwnt- WjnTn

+ qj) + ovnsin (wnt - &nTn + Ojn)]

-[kmn cos (wnTh + 0n) - wn sin (wnTn+ 0,n) e-kmnt] Fn(Sn).

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 A GENERAL BLACK BOX THEORY 357

3. Discussion. A generaltheory of systems of any kind (physical, biological,social,

etc.) has been presented which has the following main features:
(1) The theory assumes no law of nature save the principle of antecedence ("The
effect cannot occur before the cause"). Moreover, no specific variable, except time,
is involvedin the theory; and even this interpretationis dispensable:if found necessary
some other meaning could be attributedto the variables 't', 'u', 'T', and 'i'. In short,
the theory is almost abstract.
(2) A consequence of the abstract characterof the theory, together with the
broadness of its postulateschema, is a high degree of generality.In fact, it may be
regardedas a generalizationof the physical S-matrix theory (see Appendix II).
(3) The theory can be extended to systems of interconnectedboxes. Thus, if two
single-channelboxes are connected in series, the input S(2) on the second box will be
equal to the output RM1) of the first box, so that the output R(2) of the second box will
be obtainedby replacingS(2) by RM. In a sense, though, a blackbox theory of a system
of black boxes is self-defeating, since a beginning of internal structure is being
recognized.
(4) Since the theory is unconcernedwith either the basic structureof the box or the
specific nature of the stimuli and responses, it is, literally speaking, an extremely
superficial theory. This superficialityis the price that must be paid for its largecoverage.
(5) The theory is nonlocal,in the sense that it treatssystems as units and introduces
no space coordinatesto localizeits parts. The intensity of the output R does not depend
on the strengthof the input in the immediatevicinity and at an immediatelypreceding
time, but it depends on the over-all conditions prevailing throughout the box and
along all or part of its history.
(6) The theory is extremely simpleboth as regards its presuppositions and its
form: in fact, it just presupposes mathematicalanalysis and the principle of ante-
cedence; and once the various functions are specified, everything boils down to a
relation of the type of R = MS, where M (the scattering matrix) summarizes the
behavioral properties of the box, whereas R and S contain all the empirical data
concerning the controllable (non-intervening) variables. M may be regarded as an
operatorconvertingthe set of stimuli data S into the set of responses data R.
(7) The theory is untestablebecause it is almost abstract (uninterpreted). The
only relevant test would be that of usefulness: i.e., whether the proposedschemacan
cover a large number of kinds of black boxes. Moreover, even if all the variables of
the theory were interpreted, there would be no way of independently testing for M
and F[S]. In fact, one and the same (S, R) situation can be coveredby an unlimited
number of combinations of functions M and F[S]. Thus, a shock-absorbing black
box can be representedeither by a rapidly decaying M or by an F[S] insensitive to
small variations of S, such as the time average of S.
Given the above characteristics,it is conceivable that the proposed schema could
be of some use in generalbehaviortheory in the preliminarystage where mechanisms
arenot sought, either becauseof an anachronisticmethodologicalconvictionor because
the grapes are still sour.3

3The structure, scope, and function of phenomenological theories are studied in detail in the
author's "Phenomenological Theories", in M. Bunge (Ed.), The Critical Approach: Essays in
Honor of Karl Popper (Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1964).

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
358 MARIOBUNGE

APPENDIX I.
AN IMPORTANT CLASS OF INVERSE PROBLEMS

In the text only the prediction problem (cf. section 1) was treated in some elementary
cases. The inverse prediction problem and the explanation problem become well-
defined if the "memory" of the box is limited and if it depends only on the interval
u - t between the stimulus action and the observation time. If
O ,u <0;
[49] M(t, u) =
M(u- t), u > O
then for the single-channel box we have
t
[50] R(t) = f du M(t - u)F[S(u -T)]
0

and similarly for the multiple-channel box. Multiplying by e-8t and integrating between
0 and oo, we obtain
oo rt
[51] f
0
co
dt e-stR(t) = f0 dt e-st f
0
du M(u - t)F[S(u-r)].

Now, if the following integrals exist,

r(s) f dt e-stR(t), (s) f dt e-stM(t), f(s) f dt e-stF[S(t -

0 00
then by the Faltung theorem [51] becomes
[52] r(s) = m(s)f(s).
The inverse problem of prediction is then solved by computing the inverse Laplace
transform of
f(s) = r(s)/m(s).
And the problem of explanation is solved by finding the inverse Laplace transform of
m(s) = r(s)/f(s).
In most cases the tables of Laplace transforms will do a large part of the job.

APPENDIX II.
SUBSUMPTION OF THE S-MATRIX THEORY

The scattering operator (equivalent to our M-matrix) connects the initial state in the
remote past, 0(- oo), with the final state in the remote future, b(oo),in the form
[53] p(oo) = S(- oo).
This formula is obtained from our postulate schema [1] by putting
R =S=S k,F(S) = S =0
= 0O, M(t, u)- M' a(u + t), M = const.
With these substitutions, we get
+(t)-M(t, - 00(-t)
In particular,
O(oo)= M(oo, - oo)0(- oo),
where M(oo, - 00) is the scattering operator, which in physics is usually denoted 'S'.

This content downloaded from 205.186.52.23 on Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:45:30 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions