Deep learning has a specific meaning, being a variety of hierarchical pattern recognition, and the Watson version that played Jeopardy did not manifest deep learning ...
See Stellan Ohlsson's book "Deep Learning" for a cognitive science treatment of deep learning that is not tied to neural nets or any other particular implementation... http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/psychology/cognition/deep-learning-how-mind-overrides-experience -- Ben G On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 9:05 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > Even though Watson-Jeopardy did not use Neural Networks or something > that was intuitively similar to them, I believe it was an example of > deep learning. But the question that many of us are more interested in > is was it an example of Narrow AI? My first response is that it is not > because it can be applied to such a wide range of problems (even out > of the box-or out of the virtual box). So then, why isn't it AGI? Why > can't it think outside the box? Why does it not demonstrate the traits > of what I call semi-strong AI? This question bothered me but I think I > finally have figured it out. > > Part of the answer is that it (probably) is not very good at what I > call Conceptual Integration. But that does not really answer the > question adequately. > > I think they were able to eliminate the Frame Problem because the > Jeopardy system was explicitly designed for Q&A. The relevancy problem > (a form of the frame problem) occurs because most questions can lead > to a combinatorial explosion of possibilities. But by focusing on > specific kinds of questions which have distinctive characteristics > they could eliminate many kinds of open ended questions. > > For example, is it likely that I will create an actual AI program > (that does something novel) or is it unlikely? Right now I can't > answer that question. Not only is an open ended question but it is > also a question which does not have a well-defined answer path. > However, I could make long arguments supporting either possibility. I > think I noted this a few years ago but a Jeopardy question has to have > a historical, encyclopedic or journalistic entry to support it. When > you look at Watson's second choices to its questions many of them > seemed to be surprisingly irrelevant. > > But the Q&A frame really does not narrow the question about why it > worked sufficiently. Extensive knowledge about NLP, both from earlier > sources and derived by the analysis of text is also necessary. > > So I think that Watson is not Narrow AI but its success depended on > its application to narrow kinds of problems. > > This analysis may be superficial but it gives me some insight about > what I want to work on. I will probably end up developing a semi-AI > program that can endlessly ruminate on my thoughts about some subject. > Jim Bromer > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/212726-deec6279 > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > -- Ben Goertzel, PhD http://goertzel.org "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George Bernard Shaw ------------------------------------------- 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
