In my view, intelligence is essentially about *utilizing understanding to make decisions*, and understanding means having a predictive model. So for me, intelligence is about representing reality with a model and using that model effectively.
There are elements of all four previously mentioned viewpoints that come into play: 1. The ability to effectively use language is a decent litmus test for the presence of an accurate and meaningful world model. 2. To be truly flexible in a changing environment, the model must be self-organizing. Otherwise the model will cease to be accurate and meaningful over time. 3. I consider it possible to be intelligent in a limited way without utilizing understanding towards effective action -- something I call "observational intelligence" -- but such an intelligence has very limited use, namely in the ability to answer queries and make predictions on request. Ideally an intelligent system will be able to put the insights present in its world model towards effective decision making to control the environment, which I call "active intelligence". Also, the learning rate of a purely observational intelligence would be severely limited by a failure to explore and interact with the environment. 4. A good world model will have a high compression ratio, identifying the relevant features of any situation -- which to me sounds a lot like human insight. None of the four points by itself constitutes intelligence, in my opinion, as none of them predicates the presence of a model and therefore none of them fully encompasses my notion of understanding: 1. Language use can be faked through the sufficiently advanced application of statistical methods. These are not, however, intelligent in my view, as the system is only using the crystallized intelligence present in the data it has already assimilated, and any conversation that requires new thoughts will go beyond the ability of the system to respond. 2. Even a simple crystal is self-organizing. Clearly this alone does not make a system intelligent, or we would have to consider table salt intelligent. 3. A process control system can be created for any given process, however complex, provided enough programmer hours are put into it, but the real test is when the system finds itself in a new and unforeseen environment. Without a world model that is updated to reflect the new environment, the system will flounder, however optimized it may be towards familiar settings. 4. Compression produces a model, but does not engage it towards effective decision making. >From where I stand, each of the four viewpoints captures an important but incomplete part of the picture, like the blind men grasping at the elephant. We must put them together to truly make sense of the phenomenon, and it is this which my perspective attempts to do. On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:17 AM, Steve Richfield via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: > PM, > > You might be right, but I doubt it. People's intuitions are MUCH too > different for them to all run in the same direction, unless someone is > paying a LOT of money to "motivate" them to do so. > > Steve > > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 9:20 PM, Piaget Modeler via AGI <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Won't stop the diligent, however network effect will prohibit parallel >> development >> since most people will follow the leader. Network effect = following the >> leader. >> >> ~PM >> >> > Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 13:17:26 -0800 >> > Subject: Re: [agi] The Top >> > From: [email protected] >> > To: [email protected] >> >> > >> > On 1/5/15, Mike Archbold <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > On 1/4/15, Steve Richfield via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> Hi all, >> > >> >> > >> I was about to respond to Jim's latest thread regarding conceptual >> > >> structure, but then I realized that the reason everyone here is >> talking >> > >> at/past each other is that nearly everyone has a different idea as to >> > >> where >> > >> the "top" of this subject is located. First, some prospective >> examples: >> > >> >> > >> 1. Some believe that the "top" is an ability to acquire, store, >> access, >> > >> and act on information to provide a text-based interface. >> > >> 2. Some believe that the "top" is an ability to self-organize to >> form an >> > >> intelligent system. >> > >> 3. Some believe that since intelligence apparently evolved from a >> > >> primitive process control system, that paralleling this development >> might >> > >> start with a better understanding of self-organizing process control >> > >> systems. >> > >> 4. Some believe that in the process of learning how to do MUCH better >> > >> compression, that we will learn how to self-organize the process of >> > >> processing intelligent communications. >> > >> 5. There are almost as many of these as there are members on this >> forum. >> > >> I >> > >> could easily attach names (including my own) to the above, but I >> prefer >> > >> to >> > >> avoid having this devolve into an argument as to exactly what the >> various >> > >> members believe. >> > >> >> > >> OK, so just WHERE IS the real "top"? Can a system be considered to be >> > >> "intelligent" without being self-organizing? Can an approach be >> > >> considered >> > >> to be valid without being extensible to ALL of our functions? >> > >> >> > >> Myself, I think self-organization is essential, and if a system can't >> > >> even >> > >> self-organize to perform simplistic process control, e.g. like a >> hydra, >> > >> then what hope is there to ever be "intelligent" (#3 above)? >> However, I >> > >> seem to be alone in this view, yet I can't fathom how others ever >> expect >> > >> success without these basics. >> > >> >> > >> I would be interested in seeing crafted replacements or additions to >> my >> > >> above descriptions of various views of the "top", that embody SOME >> > >> reasonable rationale as to how they might lead to AGI success. >> > >> >> > >> Can anyone shine light in this very dark corner? >> > >> >> > >> Thanks. >> > >> >> > >> Steve. >> > >> >> > >> >> > > >> > > The start is usually some kind of gut feeling or intution. That leads >> > > to one of the approaches or other you've got listed, and more. The >> > > whole problem is how to work out your initial gut feeling and >> > > rigourously develop it. Without a working AGI it's impossible to know >> > > which is the correct approach, and also more than one approach is >> > > possible, different means leading to the same ends: intelligence. >> > > But, I think there is no "answer" to the problem, since a judgement is >> > > inherently subjective. So even if somebody does come up with a >> > > working AGI, it should stop others from working on competing methods, >> > > since the judgements of different systems will naturally vary. >> > > Mike A >> > > >> > >> > should read "NOT stop others..." >> > > >> > >> >> > >> ------------------------------------------- >> > >> AGI >> > >> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >> > >> RSS Feed: >> > >> https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae >> > >> 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/303/19999924-4a978ccc >> > 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> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10443978-6f4c28ac> | >> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >> <http://www.listbox.com> >> > > > > -- > Full employment can be had with the stoke of a pen. Simply institute a six > hour workday. That will easily create enough new jobs to bring back full > employment. > > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/23050605-2da819ff> | > 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
