An action could be considered a sub-program (or algorithm). We have such things as general purpose planers which can combine "actions" (i.e. sub-programs). So we already have a "sub-program" generator in the form of general purpose planners. In my vernacular sub-program = solution = plan = composite action. ~PM.
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:22:44 -0500 Subject: Re: [agi] Could Algorithm Generators be a Feasible and Effective AGI Method? From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Any effective AGI program could be considered to be a solution generator. However, we do not know how to write a general solution generator for AGI problems. If someone did he would have a working AGI program and we would all be very impressed. Two exceptions to what I am saying. One is that we can write a computer program that can solve some problems and the other is that we really do not know much about writing algorithm generators either. However, it is easier to write an algorithm generator which would generate algorithms then it would be to write a solution generator which would write solutions. A plan is not necessarily a solution. Plans can work as solutions as long as they work. The wikipedia definition of an algorithm does include the phrase, "effective procedure," so it would be a solution of some sort. However, I do not accept this narrowed definition for a number of reasons. One reason is that we could declare that the procedure does what it does so it is an effective procedure to do whatever it does. This does create problems for the definition but I think it is important to recognize that the potential that a 'sub-program' might be an effective procedure for some problem implies that a sub-program is a potential algorithm. So maybe I should call it a sub-program generator in order to avoid these kinds of disputes. Or maybe a potential-algorithm generator might be better. Even so, a plan is not necessarily a solution and effective procedure algorithms are not solutions to any problem. So I really don't understand what you are saying.Jim On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:39 AM, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]> wrote: For me a plan = a solution = an algorithm. Tell me why its' not this way with you. ~PM. Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 20:55:50 -0500 Subject: Re: [agi] Could Algorithm Generators be a Feasible and Effective AGI Method? From: [email protected] To: [email protected] On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]> wrote: What kinds of data objects are analyzed and what does analysis imply? If the algorithms are not solutions to gaps or impediments then what purpose do they serve?Kindly explain. ~PM My guess is that I did not answer your question. In order to go from input to 'understanding' an AGI program would have to do some analysis of the input. The concept of analysis could be extended to an analysis of output as well and that would be an important part of an AGI program. The algorithms that I am talking about right now would not be 'solutions' per se because they would be analytics. In other words I am emphasizing a part of a greater process. The idea of 'algorithm generators' is what is important in this thread. So while I talked about methods of reducing complexity I was only talking about methods of reducing the complexity of using 'algorithm generators' in an AGI program. I am thinking out loud so to speak, trying to see if this is a good idea. And while this may seem similar to automatic programming I am not explicitly talking about automatic programming. The algorithms that would be generated and preserved would be held because they would seem to be taking part in an effective solution. However, I just do not see the idea of a AGI solution generator as meaningful. Yes, an effective AGI program would be an effective ;solution generator' but that sounds more like advertising than a reference to a feasible artifact of computer science. An algorithm generator is feasible. Jim Bromer On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]> wrote: What kinds of data objects are analyzed and what does analysis imply? If the algorithms are not solutions to gaps or impediments then what purpose do they serve? Kindly explain. ~PM Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 11:33:10 -0500 Subject: Re: [agi] Could Algorithm Generators be a Feasible and Effective AGI Method? From: [email protected] To: [email protected] On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote: "Automated program learning" is a branch of AI that seems close to what you have in mind...This is what the MOSES component of OpenCog attempts to do, though it's currently only really effective at learning simple sorts of programs... -- Ben G I described a very narrow type of programming object. An Algorithm Generator. Because I was able to use such colloquial terms it is something that almost everyone involved with programming should be able to understand. Any AGI program would have to be capable of doing some automated program learning. The question I was trying to explore was whether or not an explicit system of algorithm generators would be useful and how they might be used. One might argue that any AGI program that was able to learn would effectively be creating (or generating) algorithms. What I am talking about is the question of designing mechanisms that explicitly generate kinds of algorithms. The algorithms that I have in mind are not solution algorithms (per se) but analytical algorithms (including algorithms that analyze data objects by making modifications). Jim Bromer AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------- 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
