Thanks Ben

Well put and deeply appreciated. However, I do not think one has to wait before 
including quantum wave functions into the architectural design for generalized 
AGI. The knowledge is involving so rapidly, and research into pinpointing the 
connection between partial collapse and the environment are advancing rapidly.

Granted, it would depend on the approach taken to developing a generalized 
version of AGI. However, the key to unlocking true quantum computing, including 
AGI as a quantum-enabled mind, probably resides in the nuclear processes 
inherent in the wave function, in all states and single state specifically. 
Understood, the need for reversibility being the control required to prevent 
the Halting problem from occurring in the environment.

For example, I think Musk's AGI-related efforts in particular seem to favour 
this approach, to enable the transformational mechanism within a quantum 
computer and connect that directly to the human brain (as environment), thereby 
facilitating the quantum flux required for informational flow to become 
persistent and pervasive.

As you beautifully stated in response to recent criticism about your decision 
to now adapt your approach to AGI development, as pure relevance, which you 
based on years of past learning. So should these emerging developments (even in 
relative infancy as new science) have relevance. Perhaps even offering the 
potential for making a quantum leap in development?

Question: If you focussed on the core mechanism for enabling a generalized AGI, 
would that not make sense to now pursue that to the fullest extent?

A core approach would still remain constructivist, enabling control hierarchies 
to be operational, but in a different sense though, rather constructing from 
the core outward, not via a classical approach of inverse reductionism, in the 
sense of a fractal approach, instead primarily relying on what emerges for the 
inherent nature of superpatterns.

Viewing this similarly to the Euro-tunnel project, drilling from both 
directions. If the science-in-engineering proved correct, the tunnel would be 
encouraged to meet up exactly and integrate as a whole.

Rob

________________________________
From: Ben Goertzel <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, 02 April 2021 07:17
To: AGI <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [agi] Toward a Useful General Theory of General Intelligence

>
> Your thoughts on quantum entanglement and AGI?
>
> Rob

I suspect that quantum computing will enable even smarter AGIs than
digital computing, but that digital computing can serve as the
substrate for AGIs with greater than human GI ...

I have argued recently that quantum probabilistic logic is a close
approximation to (an isomorphically transformed version of) uncertain
paraconsistent logic,

https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.07498

-- this direction of thinking may ultimately help w/ the design of
quantum reasoning engines.   For quantum reinforcement learning of
quantum neural nets and similar, I suspect evolutionary learning may
be a good approach, with mutation and crossover operations that can
occur w/in uncollapsed systems w/o causing collapse.   I also think
fully exploiting the power of QM for AI may require understanding weak
measurement and "partially collapsed" quantum systems like one sees in
quantum biology.   There are a lot of exciting directions here but I
currently doubt they are going to be necessary for the first
breakthrough to human-level AGI.  They may end up being breakthroughs
made *by* the initial digitally-implemented human-level or moderately
transhuman AGIs.

-- Ben

------------------------------------------
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T9a211170d976967d-Mdce64317d824baacb3cf660b
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Reply via email to