Mike,
You are right, designing a decent test is very difficult. I gave it a lot of thought, and came up with some ideas, particularly in reference to the generalizability parameter. Regarding creativity, it seems to me that creativity is not independent from generalizability. For, any system that is capable of solving some test, say Woz of Ben's fetching, will necessarily exhibit considerable creativity when it deals with many different cases, just as dogs do. Of course, if a system solves A but not B and C, I can write another program for B and yet another for C and put them all together and then solve A, B and C. True generalizability implies the ability to solve any out of an infinite number of possibilities, the only limitations being of a physical nature. For example a dog can't fetch a ball that's too big for him to bite. Here's the idea that's spinning in my head. Of course, the test should necessarily be finite, involving a finite set of well-specified cases. Could be a large set, from where test cases for each applicant are selected randomly. I want the applicant to prove that his/her code is case-independent. In other words, the code will be open and will not contain anything that could be construed as case-specific. So that's the test: proving that the code is case-independent. The applicants will be provided with a large set of test cases, and with their solutions. The applicants are free to test their code at will, perhaps even make sure that it solves all cases and gets the correct solutions for all of them. The problem is, it is difficult to assess whether a program is case independent. Difficult, but not impossible. Humans can do it. That's one of the advantages of the test, it pits humans vs humans. Quite reasonable it it is AGI. MIKE SAID> Once you think in depth about the goals of generalizability and creativity, you will realise they depend on being implemented by a body with an extensive range/spectrum of different lines of movement and observation. The body is the foundation of generality and creativity - it affords the capacity to always try out new lines of movement and looking, and handle objects and negotiate terrains in new ways. SERGIO REPLIES> Of course. But that spectrum is actually very limited. It is limited by the *available* lines of movement and observation and combinations therefrom. This is a finite spectrum. So the point is in fact how to combine my 5 fingers in each of 2 hands, my 2 eyes, etc, to, for example, throw a ball into a basket. If doing that requires 6 fingers, then I can't do it. It's not infinite, Mike. Sergio From: Mike Tintner [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2012 2:05 PM To: AGI Subject: Re: [agi] The 2 Tests of AGI - generalizability & creativity Sergio, The Woz test as I indicated to Bob is indeed extremely complicated. I used it only because it's already out there - and is therefore helpful as a *loose* guide/image. The other isn't really Ben's - it's the basic fetch test a dog faces - he must (and will) fetch a ball thrown by his master in more or less any field - this basically means he must (and will) negotiate more or less any unfamiliar terrain (within loose limits) - he can create and negotiate a course across terrains of grassy clumps, rocky ground, sandy beach, furniture and furnishings in a building et al - all of which will spring surprises also, of course, the ball could end up hidden from view in different ways and situations there's no way the dog could be specifically preprogrammed for every new terrain and hidden ball...(nor, by extension, is there any complex "set" that can infer the features of every new terrain) if your robot can simply negotiate new .terrain after new terrain somewhat like a dog (or all other life forms) and not even fetch a ball - it's AGI If we were talking a relatively simple practical starting-point, I would suggest aiming for a robot that could negotiate just a few metres of endlessly diverse terrains (wh. is more or less what roboticists are attempting now, although I'll bet they all still cheat).. P.S. I don't think a purely computational AGI project is possible. Once you think in depth about the goals of generalizability and creativity, you will realise they depend on being implemented by a body with an extensive range/spectrum of different lines of movement and observation. The body is the foundation of generality and creativity - it affords the capacity to always try out new lines of movement and looking, and handle objects and negotiate terrains in new ways. By all means try to outline a project that contradicts me. It will be interesting regardless. From: Sergio Pissanetzky <mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2012 7:27 PM To: AGI <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [agi] The 2 Tests of AGI - generalizability & creativity Mike, I like the concept of the Woz test. However, the test itself has three problems. It is unfair to those who do not build robots, and it requires the ability to recognize images, which is in itself a major test. The third problem, it requires considerable computer power, besides generalizability and creativity. It would be unfair to those who may have a good idea but lack the necessary power, such as me. Do you think it can be rephrased so as to eliminate these limitations? Can you please explain what is Ben's fetch test? Sergio From: Mike Tintner [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2012 5:37 AM To: AGI Subject: [agi] Re: The 2 Tests of AGI - generalizability & creativity P.S. The Woz Test {"go and make a cup of coffee in this new kitchen") is a test of creativity - of being able to design a course of action without specific programming. But (correct me) it isn't defined as a test of creativity - and should be. Note: there is a great deal of underlying unanimity here - in the Woz Test, Ben's fetch test and similar - but the basic principles involved (generalizability and creativity) haven't been clearly spelled out. AGI | <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> | <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Modify Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> AGI | <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> | <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Modify Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> AGI | <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> | <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; ad2> Modify Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-c97d2393 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-2484a968 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
