With respect to the AGI_survey_early_draft.pdf: your set of Competencies of Human-Level General Intelligence omits chemo-sensory inputs and the reactions to them. Not unusual; but they are strongly associated with memory activation and very strong reactions to situations.
Cheers, Gene On 2/12/2013 2:32 PM, Ben Goertzel wrote:
Hi all, Because I'm a sucker for punishment, and also because I do value the chunks of useful feedback that sometimes emerge amidst all the noise, I'm posting rough drafts of a couple in-process survey papers online and soliciting comments from list members... These are not original research papers, but rather papers written as chapters for a forthcoming book, seeking to give background regarding the AGI field... This one surveys the history of the AI field from antiquity to the present day, from an AGI-oriented perspective: http://goertzel.org/AGI_History_early_draft.pdf It's mostly not original information, but has a different slant than most histories of AI I've seen.... The timeline figures are also available at http://goertzel.org/AI_timeline/assets/player/KeynoteDHTMLPlayer.html#0 This one attempts to give an overview of the AGI field itself, at the present time: http://goertzel.org/AGI_survey_early_draft.pdf Comments will be valued, especially regarding -- important stuff that I may have inadvertently left out, that can be inserted without making the papers copiously longer -- things that I have inadvertently explained in a confusing or misleading manner (even beyond the confusingness intrinsically induced by the subject matter ;-) Comments about specific portions of the paper might be easier to incorporate into revised drafts, if you indicate exactly what text in the paper you're referring to, either with page/section numbers or snippets of text, etc. Thanks ;) Ben P.S. Comments by Mike Tintner or others about how everyone in the AGI field is totally wrong so it's worthless to survey their worthless work, or how the whole history of the AI field is a history of utter failure that doesn't deserve to be chronicled, etc. etc. -- are specifically NOT solicited. I'm looking for feedback on how to improve the papers, while keeping their general thrust the same; not for opinions on whether writing papers of this nature is even worthwhile.... I am already aware of the scope of opinions opposing the foundation of my own and others' AGI work...
------------------------------------------- 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
