I believe the opposite. I believe prediction IS the essence of verification, of correlation. Prediction based regulation (intrinsic reinforcement or correction) is practical. If not, how else would you verify? -------------------------------- > Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 15:58:25 -0400 > Subject: [agi] Prediction is not a reliable method of verification > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > Mike's response to me in the thread, "Image schemas control all forms > of action [Lakoff replies]" demonstrates what is wrong with the > "prediction" method of confirmation of a theory about the world. Mike > acts as if he believes that since no one has a demonstration of an AGI > program that this proves that a computer program (an algorithm as he > calls it) is unable to deal effectively with new situations. Most of > believe that this conclusion is completely wrong. At the very least > his unanswered challenge does not in any way confirm his theory. > > Now he might associate his prediction with a more constrained theory, > like he predicts that no one in this group has an actual working AGI > program and the lack of a taker for his challenge to produce one > verifies it. Ok, but again the fact that no one is willing to accept > his challenge does not actually verify that. There could be someone > who has a working AGI program. > > But even if we take it as verifying evidence, there is still no way > that an automated program, which had to rely on prediction as a method > to confirm its theories can actually verify that the predicted event > truly happened and it truly verified its theory. So even with a more > constrained theory, in order to use prediction as a method to confirm > a theory you first have to find a way to verify that the theory and > the prediction were well constructed, the theory and the prediction > were both uniquely interdependent and the observation by which the > prediction was "confirmed" was also uniquely correct. > > In other words, if we had an AGI program that was able to think then > we might use the prediction method just as a human being might use it. > Or misuse it. > > This shows that the verification through prediction is a faulty a > concept as logic or any of the other would-be verification methods. > > Jim Bromer > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/19999924-5cfde295 > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: 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
