Quoting Jeff Hawkins, AAAI-13 workshop. July 15, 2013. ~PM Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 09:34:30 +0100 Subject: Re: [agi] A Very Simple AGI Project From: [email protected] To: [email protected]
Some have said that representation is the only problem of AI. ~PM Care to expand a little? I guess, off the top of my head, I can partly agree - actually creative problemsolving is what AGI is about. But you need a creative form/medium of representation to do that. And that medium is concepts - eg GO TO THE KITCHEN - narrow AI (the whole of present AI) can't do concepts. On 29 July 2013 01:46, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]> wrote: Some have said that representation is the only problem of AI. ~PM From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [agi] A Very Simple AGI Project Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 20:07:17 -0400 One of the interesting but disappointing things about groups like this is that there is pretty serious lack of insightful criticism and comment. Part of that, of course, is just based on simple lack of understanding, but most of it seems based on total disbelief that the premises of the approaches that have been talked about are being taken seriously. I really cannot understand how anyone can take AIXI seriously and I cannot understand how someone can take the neuroscience approach seriously. It would be as if I were to say that I am working on an AGI program that is based on a polynomial time solution to Boolean SAT (which I will one day solve.) I mean, can you take something like that seriously without first seeing the polynomial time solution (or an amazing AGI program which was based on it)? There is nothing wrong with looking at these ideas and seeing how far you can go with them, but I think there is a lot wrong with believing that one of these methods are currently viable. Using Bayesian methods, compression methods and information theory, trying to create algorithms that emulate observed and theoretical neural processes, and trying to come up with creative logical methods all make perfect sense to me. I just think that the fringe science that is based on taking some sound methods to an absurd theoretical extreme looks like a pretty terrible place to start. I went through some severe cold feet with my own would-be AGI project. The massive inefficiency of a practical method of representing the possibilities is really unacceptable. I just could not get myself going with such inept representational methods that we seem to be stuck with. However, after going through a couple of days of talking myself into acceptance I finally came up with an elementary system that would create some efficiencies without making the look-ups too deep. I am thinking of the problem of initial recognition but it is the same through out all the stages of analysis and response. I am just going to come up with a simple intuitive method to reduce the grossest inefficiencies that a simpler implementation of my ideas would create. I thought about using numerous Neural Networks or a Bayesian Networks for the initial recognition lookup problem, but then I started wondering about a more definitive network that would use a few of the characteristics of the neural network (it would become more extensive to represent more inputs or to be more precise in determining the outputs for a particular kind of input) but it would also have the characteristics of the network that I have been thinking of (it might utilize a greater variety of specific markers to represent syntactic characteristics of input and output, it could use reason based reasoning and so on. The only problem with this plan is that I haven't figured it out yet. The whole project is supposed to help me discover how I might create such a thing, so I really don't know if I could start the project with it. I might try a simplified version of it. I might use weighted evaluations but they could, for example, be used to represent approximations to multiple output values (representing indexes to data). It would not be a conventional Neural or Bayesian Network. For example, it could be designed to represent approximations to values in some non-conventional ways. This is an interesting idea. I have to think about it for a few days. Jim Bromer 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
