An assertion is the notion of the truth of the assertion as something that can be considered (is what I meant to say of course.)
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > I didn't mean to say that using probability and weighted reasoning were > wrong or something. I just meant that you cannot use probability without > the supposition of a logically sound frame (or something). > Jim Bromer > > On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Charles, >> The notion of the probability of a prediction (an expectation in general >> human language) is nonsensical if you have ruled out assertions. Since you >> are not ruling out assertions you are unwittingly allowing the notion of >> "truth" in the front door even as you are chasing it out the back. An >> assertion is a notion of the truth of the assertion as a likely >> possibility. If you are saying that an AGI program was capable of somewhat >> reliably deducing the probability of a prediction then you are asserting >> that the process was based on the strength and the truth of the application >> of the methods used to derive those probabilities. >> >> If it were easy for a computer program to attain the probability of an >> event based on observations of past events then this kind of discussion >> would not be relevant to AGI. The problem is that events are actually >> complexities which are not only composed of distinct 'kinds' of events and >> some background 'noise' but of different variations of 'kinds' of events >> and a lot of other events. The science of using probability and >> statistics is premised on the methodical actions of an agent who is not >> only intelligent but highly trained in the science of the applied >> statistical methods. The idea that intelligence can be founded on >> statistics is backwards. >> Jim Bromer >> >> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Charles Hixson < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 02/19/2013 11:03 AM, Piaget Modeler wrote: >>> >>> >>> I'm sure this topic has been discussed before. Sorry for rehashing it >>> if so. I have a specific question I'd like to answer. >>> >>> >>> In designing a cognitive system, someone made a criticism that utterly >>> confounded me. And got me thinking. >>> >>> The system receives sensory data sets from the world and transforms >>> them into percept propositions which it asserts to >>> its memory. Each percept proposition is activated when it is asserted. >>> Infereneces are made from these percepts. >>> These initial percepts and its inferences are called "Observables". All >>> observables can be activated, but there is only a >>> notion of activation. >>> >>> Next, the system can predict that these observables will recur at some >>> point. But the prediction refers only to predicting >>> the re-activation of observables. >>> >>> Then some one asked, where is the notion of TRUTH in your system. I >>> was flabbergasted. Speechless. Then I asked >>> well what is truth? I checked wikipedia. ( >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth ) >>> >>> >>> It turns out that when someone says something is true, it means a very >>> many things: >>> >>> a) It means that the statement is logically consistent (validity), >>> b) that the statement corresponds, concurs, or conforms to reality >>> (verity), >>> c) that one is sure of the statement (certainty / confidence), >>> d) that the statement is likely to occur rather than unlikely >>> (Likelihood), and >>> e) that we agree with the statement (agreement). >>> >>> So my questions are: >>> >>> (1) Is truth necessary or important to a cognitive system? >>> (2) Which notion of truth should a cognitive system model? >>> (3) How do we ascribe truth (values) to sensory input or inferences >>> derived from sensory input? >>> >>> Your thoughts? >>> >>> ~PM. >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *Confidential *- *This message is meant solely for the intended >>> recipient. Please do not copy or forward this message without * >>> *the consent of the sender. If you have received this message in error, >>> please delete the message and notify the sender.* >>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/232072-58998042> | >>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>> >>> Truth is an illusion. It is the belief that what you believe to be most >>> likely is, in fact, inevitable. >>> >>> An AI doesn't need the concept of truth...except to communicate with >>> people. Internally it can operate off of graded degrees of probability, >>> cost, benefit, etc. When communicating with people it needs to condense >>> that so that when something has more than a certain amount of probability, >>> and the benefit of asserting it is sufficiently large, and the cost of >>> being wrong is sufficiently small, then it synopsizes this as proclaiming >>> "truth". It's my belief that people operate in the same way, though this >>> is disguised because different people use different constraints on things >>> like "What is probable enough?". Also note that the cost and the benefit >>> are figured on the basis of the cost/benefit to the entity proclaiming a >>> truth rather than on those accepting it. >>> >>> So perhaps we would want a sufficiently capable AI to avoid talking >>> about truth, and instead talk about what the probabilities are, and what >>> costs and benefits can be expected. It's a bit harder to understand, but >>> it strikes me as much safer. >>> >>> -- >>> Charles Hixson >>> >>> *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
