How can the three-level hierarchy be empirically validated against qualitative, behavioral, and neural data?

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

• The correct level of agency is an empirical question, not a philosophical one.claim0.752
  We must determine the optimal stance by testing what predictive/control strategies work best.
• Performance-optimized hierarchical models predict neural responses in higher visual cortex (Yamins et al., 2014)concept0.752
  Demonstrated CNN representations predict neurons in visual cortex; background motivation for neural-network-brain correspondence.
• How Should We Empirically Determine The Appropriate Levelquestion0.751
• Behavioural patterns associated with subjective experiences in humans are considered valid for inferring cognition in non-human animals but not in diverse other systems including plants.claim0.726
  The double standard pointed out by S&C and endorsed by the authors.
• Multiple distinct quantitative and qualitative dimensions make it robust that digital minds will be super-beneficiaries at technological maturityclaim0.724
  The paper's central empirical-philosophical thesis synthesizing nine paths
• AI self-reports about experience constitute valid empirical data even without proving consciousness.claim0.724
• Perhaps we will need three levels of specification, internal, input-output and accomplishment.hypothesis0.722
  Speculation about specification hierarchy.
• The correct level of agency for a system is an empirical question determined by which intervention strategy provides the most efficient prediction and control.claim0.721
  Central methodological claim of TAME: optimal position on the persuadability continuum is found through experiments, not philosophical definition.