I have (mostly) extricated myself from family matters. This IGI paper and the IGI itself are now top priority. I look forward to seeing what has happened in the last week.
Cheers Colin Hales -----Original Message----- From: "Dorian Aur" <[email protected]> Sent: 27/05/2015 4:47 AM To: "AGI" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [agi] H-AGI towards S-AGI Colin et al, That's a good introduction to consciousness, we need a more direct/ practical approach to AGI - the hybrid system can be the fastest and less expensive approach to AGI and anyone from computer science, electronics, nanotechnology to neuroscience can contribute. 4 The hybrid approach to AGI The origins of the entire problem started a few decades ago when by mistake action potentials were approximated by stereotyped digital events. As a result many scientists were encouraged to imagine that brain computations can be thoroughly simulated and mapped on digital computers using connectionist models. It became a mob opinion and in spite of recent refutation, this flawed view continued to be sustained and all brain initiatives followed this vision. "Don’t be trapped by dogma, which is living the results of other people’s thinking for six decades." Understanding the brain language and the development of AI techniques are highly co-dependent.To understand the main problem we can start with two relevant examples of algorithmic development. a. The simulation on digital computers can faithfully reproduce the characteristics of the flight b. “Realistic” models of neurons (e.g. Hodgkin-Huxley) simulated on a digital computer do not succeed to display or generate intelligent behavior This gap between (a) and (b) can be easily explained. In the first case the simulation on a digital computer is successful since the model is able to realistically include the physics of flight. In the second case biological structure uses molecular/quantum computations to integrate meaningful information . Such biophysics responsible for intelligent behavior is not included in current models ( e.g. . Hodgkin-Huxley) neither in any AGI attempts. Since molecular/quantum computations can be hardly reproduced on digital computers replicating these computation using any algorithmic approach is far more difficult.We already know that wiring together a set of non AGI systems may never generate AGI. What is the solution? We know that the loss of natural biophysics leads to issues in case of the second model . Clearly, to solve the problem one needs to find a way to include the full model of computation generated within biological structure . Having built a system that evolves in a similar way our brains do will solve the problem and guarantee that the resulting “computing machine” will be able to integrate meaningful information.At least two phases are needed to construct a mind using biological building blocks A.The first phase will require growing a biological structure either from natural stem cells or from induced pluripotent cells. Providing nutrients, oxygen and environmental interaction is needed to shape the structure and control spatial organization of cells . B. The second phase will create a virtual world in which the evolving biostructure can be trained to learn and experience live scenes following a specific gradual program. It is likely that after training the hybrid system will be able to mimic human behavior in the ‘real’ world. The first phase will require developing a system and technology to grow a biological structure. The entire development will be regulated using a computer interface equipped with microcontrollers and different nanosensors. The digital computer will obtain real-time information regarding the state of the evolving structure and detect the need of neurotrophic factors, nutrients and oxygen. This phase will allow biological building blocks to self-assemble and organize into discrete, interdependent domains. Different ways to deliver nutrients, oxygen, and achieve spatial and temporal control of living tissue by manipulating molecular and genetic technology can be explored (Delcea et al., 2011; Lewandowski, et al., 2013; Takebe et al., 2013; Deisseroth and Schnitzer, 2013; Wickner and Schekman, 2005). Dielectrophoretic actuation will be used for cell manipulation to shape the evolving 3D structure (Pethig et al., 2010; Reyes, 2013; Velugotla et al., 2012). In addition, carbon nanotubes will provide the physical support for development. They can be used to create conductive structures to perform bidirectional communication between the evolving biostructure and computers. This will allow monitoring the evolution of neurons, glial cells, ... delivering neurotrophic factors and engineering all structures. The second phase will require to build bidirectional communication between the evolving brain and the computer to create a virtual world and enhance learning. One can read and interpret the information processed in the evolving structure by using data recorded from different nanosensors. Using computer technology a virtual world will be able to provide accelerated training. Substitutional reality will enhance learning, the evolving brain will be able to mimic human behavior in the real world. The entire model can be schematically conceptualized as an interactive training system that shapes the development of biological structure based on natural language and visual information This hybrid approach is a direct path to generate general intelligence. One can shape and "program" a biological structure and connect it with digital computers to develop human like intelligence. In addition to algorithms that run on digital computers one can use biological building blocks to build a full model of computation. Building such system will represent the first step in reliably solving natural language processing tasks. They are “hard problems” for any algorithmic design.The hybrid system will be a new tool for discovery, far more powerful than any digital system alone. H-AGI can be seen as a transitional step required to understand which parts can be fully replicated in a synthetic form to build a more powerful computing system. Note: IGI is a game-changing strategy - brings together AI, AGI, neuroscience, nanotechnology to design/build a full model of computation. We need someone like Steve Jobs - that will make all the difference for IGI. I tried to keep it simple, please feel free to correct, add.... Dorian PS. "And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition..... Don’t be trapped by dogma" On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Colin Hales <[email protected]> wrote: Dorian et. al. Installment #2 of my stab at a paper. It is section 5 in the original docx. This is a section on the synthetic approach and the science of consciousness .... again with a slant on AGI investment. Section 4 is next and is where I'll need Dorian's contribution for the organic synthetic AGI program example. I have put in a section for references although only a few have been put in as yet. I suggest an acknowledgement section. Because of my personal circumstances meaning I can't spend time in discussion until next week, if I could continue my 'seagull' depositing technique it would be greatly appreciated. =================================== 5 Machine consciousness and the synthetic AGI approach Synthetic AGI, whatever the chosen hybridization level, cannot divorce itself from dealing with consciousness. Indeed, in introducing synthetic approaches to AGI such as those described above, it becomes quite clear that the discipline of AGI itself and the science of consciousness are deeply connected. We find ourselves faced with the realization that the science of consciousness and the AGI program may actually be regarded, eventually, as the same thing. It seems worth acknowledging the possibility that the explicit recognition of that state of affairs is actually central to the proposed changes in AGI approach. To see this confronting possibility we can use the established vocabulary of the youthful science of consciousness (Hales, 2014). In the most general sense that can be used in a science context, the word consciousness refers to the first-person-perspective (1PP) of anything. We can consider consciousness of X to be ‘what it is like to be X from the first person perspective of being X’. To scientifically study consciousness is to construct some kind of account predictive of the 1PP of some part of the natural world. We need have no theory of consciousness to speak of it this way. Nor need we attribute any relationship between consciousness-as-the-1PP and any behaviour or memory or any other state of affairs. We need not presuppose any particular chunk of the natural world to speak of consciousness this way. It is a completely general concept. It is one of the few concrete positions that the science of consciousness has been able to formulate. Consider ‘being’ a rock. What might the scientific statement of the consciousness, the 1PP, of a rock be? Rocks cannot behave. Yet we have to admit that from the perspective of being the rock there may be a 1st person perspective of some kind. It may be an experience of ‘happy’ or ‘cold’ or something more sophisticated. For example there may be a visual scene, from the point of view of being the rock, of everything surrounding the rock. If we had a science of consciousness and we were able to claim, scientifically, that ‘it is not like anything from the 1PP of a rock’ and that claim was to be scientifically accepted, what would that scientific statement look like? The answer to this riddle is that currently we do not know. What we can demonstrate, however, is that central to the synthetic AGI science program is the potential to be able to say something about consciousness – the 1PP – in a way that was previously impossible. That is why we have to accept, from its inception, that synthetic AGI and the matter of the science of consciousness are deeply enmeshed. This can be a difficult mental leap to make for some investigators. To help, consider the 1PP of a bacterium, worm, mouse, dog, computer, a neuromorphic chipset, tree, rock, human. Of all these things the only thing we know for sure is that ‘it is like something’ to be that part of the natural world called a human or, better, to ‘be a human brain’. It is also one of the few proved facts of the science of consciousness that whatever the physics involved in the generation of a 1PP, it is contained within human brain tissue only and no other part of the human. This knowledge of the existence of a 1PP is accepted despite us being unable to scientifically prove it to each other. This is because we cannot observe observations (the mental experiential life of another human) themselves. The science of consciousness is a scientific account of how we observe at all – in the first place. All we can actually observe with consciousness is brain material delivering consciousness - an act of observation - to the brain itself, from the 1PP. Some deny consciousness exists at all (Dennett, 1991). Some accept consciousness as real but irrelevant to intelligence and cognition. We are forced here to accept that there is something to explain, not because any particular position is right or wron [The entire original message is not included.] ------------------------------------------- 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
