Re: [agi] confirmation paradox

2006-08-10 Thread Yan King Yin
On 8/9/06, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are two different issues: whether an external communication language needs to be multi-valued, and whether an internal representation language needs to be multi-valued. My answer to the former is No, and to the latter is Yes. Many people

Re: [agi] confirmation paradox

2006-08-10 Thread Pei Wang
YKY, It is inevitable to be vacillating at the beginning. It will be fine as long as you don't begin to build the system before your design is relatively stable. I don't think predicate logic plus probability is the way to go, but won't try to convince you by email. I've said more in my

Re: [agi] fuzzy logic necessary?

2006-08-10 Thread Yan King Yin
On 8/8/06, J. Andrew Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:C'mon, the brain is not so dumb. Which is precisely why it does not retain patterns more complex than is strictly necessary to get the job done.The most efficient representation of pi, for almost all practical purposes, is as a sequence of

Re: [agi] confirmation paradox

2006-08-10 Thread Charles D Hixson
Yan King Yin wrote: ... To avoid confusion we can fix it that the probability/NTV associated with a sentence is always interpreted as the (subjective) probability of that sentence being true. So p( all ravens are black ) will become 0 whenever a single nonblack raven is found. If, from