On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I meant frequency, sorry > > > > "Strength" is a term Pei used for frequency in some old sicsussions... > > Another correction: "strength" is never used in any NARS publication. > It was used in some Webmind documents, though I guess it must be your > idea, since I never like this term. ;-) >
As I recall, the use of the term (in discussions rather than publications) was your idea, *but* the context in which it was suggested was as follows. We wanted a term for a variable in the Webmind Java code that would be applicable to both NARS and PLN truth values, and would be burdened as little as possible with specific theoretical interpretation. So you suggested strength. I'm not sure why we didn't just use "frequency" instead. I remember you did not want to call it "probability." (This was, unbelievably, 10 years ago, so I don't want to bet my right arm on the details of my recollection ... but that's how I remember it...) > > > The exact formulas used in NARS are basically heuristics derived based > > on "endpoint conditions", so replicating those exact formulas is really > > not important IMO... the key would be replicating their qualitative > > behavior... > > I have to say that I don't like the term "heuristics", neither, since > it usually refers to "quick-and-dirty" replacement of the "real > thing". I didn't mean anything negative via the word "heuristic" ... and you didn't suggest an alternative word ;-) ben ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=114414975-3c8e69 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
