Matt, You reckon the chimp who was able to creatively describe a duck as "water bird" using its 180-or-whatever word vocabulary, was engaged in a very complex, massively parallel processing, act?
Complex perhaps if you regard the underlying imaginative processing as complex in itself. But not complex in its consideration of options. But yes of course, language is an extremely hard problem (unbeknownst to Jim who has a whole life to waste on database approaches). On 26 October 2013 21:43, Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> wrote: > Do you think you could write a program to parse the email you just > wrote? Do you think you could write a program to translate it into > another language? > > Language evolved to be efficiently learnable on a very complex, > embodied, 1 petaflop, 100 TB parallel computer, whose software took 3 > billion years to write, after being fed training data over a 1 Gb/s > sensory input channel for several years. Are you surprised it's a hard > problem? > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > > I am convinced that it would be easy to get a text-based Learning-AI > > program learn to respond in fairly simple ways to simple texts. (And > > I will be in a position to try it out in the near future.) The > > question is whether this kind of ability has to be at the expense of > > an ability to integrate more sophisticated kinds of learning into it. > > > > I just do not see why people have not produced solid examples of > > simple learning using text-based AI unless the problem was either that > > they felt they needed to impress the skeptics or they became > > confounded by their own, more complicated use of language. > > > > Simple language does not have to be at the level of a programming > > language. I think that programming languages are "context free" > > because even though the apparent context may seem to violate the > > context of the substrings taken separately, any particular string > > (that is any grammatical string) will still only generate one > > particular output. > > > > So a computer could (genuinely) learn about simple strings that might > > not be context free and use them to generate different points. As > > long as this was kept relatively simple it should be completely > > feasible and it might be a good starting point to examine what was > > going on. (Even though a text only AI program would not be capable of > > applying its knowledge in a sophisticated way, it could still > > constitute genuine learning in my opinion because it would be able to > > learn new things within the domain of the text-based interactions.) > > > > So even though my data management system is neither simple nor > > sophisticated, I believe that I will be able to use it for simple but > > somewhat sophisticated kind of learning which would be general within > > the limits of the domain of text. > > > > Jim Bromer > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > > AGI > > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > > RSS Feed: > https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/3701026-786a0853 > > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > > > > -- > -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5 > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: 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
