Brad wrote:
> I think this is a core principle of AGI design and that a system that
> only makes inferences it *knows* are correct would be fairly
> uninteresting and incapable of performing in the real world.  The fact
> that the information in the P(xi|xj) list is very incomplete is what
> makes the problem interesting.
> 
> Or maybe I'm misinterpreting your intent.
>
I agree perfectly with your "core principle", and my proposal was not to
only make inferences that you know are correct. I think you may be
misinterpreting: lets say that we know P(Xi), and want to guess at P(Xi|Xj).
We have insufficient knowledge, so we need to make some assumptions to
approximate P(Xi|Xj).  I argue that under these circumstances, the best
assumption to make is that Xi and Xj are independent, (ie, P(Xi|Xj)=P(Xi)). 
Does this clarify things?

Moshe

> 
> 
> -Brad
> 
> -------
> To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
> subscription,  please go to
> http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, 
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to