Memetic algorithms sound like more of the same. Maybe I am not getting it but it doesn't sound like it is going to lead to anything that less formalized methods haven't been able to do. It seems obvious to me that a memetic algorithm is not a breakthrough method that would make an AGI program feasible.
You say that a meme is a strategy? Before I read the thing on Memetic Algorithms I thought that that remark made perfect sense, but now that I have read it I am wondering what are you talking about? I mean really. A genetic algorithm is a neat thing, ok and I can understand that a variation on it is very interesting. But to believe that it will solve the kinds of problems that you would need it to solve is inexplicable. This is not a solution to np-complexity it is a generator of it. Isn't it obvious? Have I missed some great efficacy that lurks in the method that was hidden in my superficial reading of the description in Wikipedia? If I had I am pretty sure I would have sensed it. A concept or a meme cannot (reliably or always) be decomposed into a set of elemental parts. Because the parts of the concept are concepts themselves they can be studied, further explored, expanded and grouped with other related concepts. This is a property that I call relativistic. Of course you can use recombinations of concepts and memes and that method is necessary for imaginative projection and analysis and so on. But to believe that a method like memetic algorithms would lead to greater comprehension - in all significant cases - does not seem like a reasonable presumption to me. Jim Bromer On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]>wrote: > > Jim: First, a meme cannot be modelled in the same way a superficial data > string can be. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetic_algorithm > > In the lingua of MA a meme is a strategy; individuals within populations > are recombined. > > In PAM-P2 a solution is an individual, and solutions do undergo > recombination and mutation > during regulation and compensation. > > ~PM. > > ------------- > > The wikipedia definition of memetics was interesting. Assuming that I can > make a pretty good guess about how your idea of memetic recombination might > work, I would say that your imagined usage of the method has some serious > problems. First, a meme cannot be modelled in the same way a superficial > data string can be so the comparison of memetic algorithms to recombination > in genetic algorithms seems fanciful. Secondly the idea that the > attributes of a concept might be clearly differentiated in an automated > system that is able to learn and then used to clearly integrate different > ideas seems unlikely. I do not think the concept is impossible, I think > that it is complicated. It is a problem of complexity. You mentioned that > you thought you can avoid complexity by using many small search problems. > Although I cannot point to this or that study which can drive this point > home, I do feel that there is ample evidence that domain restricted > learning has not worked in AI just because we need to use concepts outside > of the domain in order to understand those concepts which are strongly > within the domain. (By the way, here is where an imagined efficiency of > using weighted evaluations can really turn to nonsense. You can't eliminate > the need to look outside the domain to determine meaning or relevance > just by putting a numerical value on how much a meme belongs to a > particular domain.) > > > Jim Bromer > > > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10561250-470149cf> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>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-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
