On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Anastasios Tsiolakidis <[email protected]> wrote: > >... full-blown language depends on a constant ... redefining words and >occasionally creating new ones...Reaching out to the millions of words and >meanings and uses and deciding which ones will do the trick or which ones to >modify to do the trick, well, even in terms of parallel programming and >complexity metrics is a bit of a nightmare. >
Not necessarily. I think it is necessary to find a way to keep the core of the ability to converse very simple. From there imaginative projections onto the language might be used to transform the simple core knowledge into a greater diversity and that ability could be reversed to use to interpret expressions. I think Norvig and Thrun had an example of how Bayesian Nets were used to capture the relations of few simplified shapes of three different body types, then when other nets were used to capture the changes that the motions of one body made, the information was combined to project how the other bodies would appear making the same motion. Although extensive variations of 3-D spatial information had been rendered mathematically long before the modern era of computer-generated animation, I believe that projective transformations can be found for words and concepts. However, you have to get rid of the notion that you can fit language into a 3-D mathematical space before you could possibly hope to make any progress in that kind of thing. At any rate the key to overcoming the complexity is to use a reasonably concise core of knowledge that could then be imaginatively projected to produce variations that can capture the essence of a situation. It doesn't have to be perfect, just understandable. -- Jim Bromer ------------------------------------------- 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
