Conventional evolutionary framework cannot explain adaptations in systems that are not already evolutionary units, creating a chicken-and-egg problem for ETIs

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• How can selection explain adaptations at system level before the higher-level unit exists as an evolutionary unit?question0.822
  Fundamental challenge: conventional evolutionary theory cannot explain system-level features required for ETI without presupposing the higher-level unit.
• Evolutionary transitions must be explained by bottom-up selection on existing lower-level units without presupposing higher-level unitclaim0.799
• ETIs are the evolutionary equivalent of deep learning: (i) required functional relationships encode non-decomposable functions, (ii) these are enacted by basal cognition mechanisms, and (iii) conditions for deep model induction predict ETI occurrence.hypothesis0.797
  Overarching three-part hypothesis stated in introduction
• Evolution often produces general-purpose problem-solving machines whose capacities cannot be inferred from the default invariant course of development.claim0.779
  A claim about the outcome of the MCA-enhanced process.
• A connectionist approach resolves the chicken-and-egg problem of ETIs by focusing on the changing organisation of relationships between lower-level units, not unit frequenciesclaim0.777
  The paper's proposed solution
• Before a transition, the higher-level unit of selection does not exist, yet complex adaptations creating that unit must evolve through bottom-up selection on lower-level units.claim0.771
  Central theoretical puzzle in ETI research: explains why existing frameworks struggle with ETI explanation.
• For a new level of individuality to have causal role as evolutionary unit, heritable fitness differences must be non-aggregative (not decomposable into lower-level differences).claim0.766
  Core claim: monotonic non-linearities are insufficient; evolutionary outcomes must change depending on context.
• Close-knit adaptation of system elements arising over time is central observable in nature and human-formed ecological systems but eludes simple algorithmic formulation.claim0.766
  Alexander's core assertion that subtle adaptive processes are too simple and common-sense-based for conventional computation but profoundly important.