Jim,

It is (nearly?) impossible to "learn" in a way that preserves value (e.g.
50%), dimensionality (e.g. probability), and probably significance (e.g.
+/-10%) without constraining learning to ONLY learn things that fit this
model. Without this model, it is just numerology that can NEVER EVER be
made to work - because there could be NO way to understand and/or debug
such a thing, either through automation (deep learning) or manually (as I
have tried).

Steve


On Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 6:42 PM Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote:

> The 'formal' part of the system can be acquired through learning.
> Jim Bromer
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 9:14 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Yeh Steve - maybe that helps it try novel situations better???
>> newsflash from me ->  i think that formalizing the system manually ends
>> up a shallower system than what needs to be there for a developing system.
>>   because its cheating it to do things,  is it where the term "deep
>> learning" comes from?
>>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>*
> / AGI / see discussions <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> +
> participants <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery
> options <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> Permalink
> <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T395236743964cb4b-M04ad1d128d4d310c6352f166>
>

------------------------------------------
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T395236743964cb4b-M935ffba0b4b0bfcf42422818
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Reply via email to