On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote:
> For domains in which one is concerned with recognizing large ensembles
> of weak patterns, the language one uses to represent patterns can make
> a big difference...
>
> Image analysis, genetic data analysis and financial prediction are
> contexts in which I've found this to be the case
>
> In these settings, if one does pattern recognition via automated
> program learning with an Occam bias,
> the underlying language relative to which the Occam bias is expressed
> makes a big difference...

Absolutely, but these overheads are not constants - the computational
cost of a poor choice of representation language is typically
exponential.

> From a different direction, consider Hutter's proof that AIXI-tl is as
> good as any other reinforcement learning system ... up to an arbitrary
> constant.

Well, much violence is being done to the word 'constant' in this case.
Sure, f(N) is constant for a given N, but... :)


-------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to