> If a 30x30 pixel grid is what you mean by content-richness, then I do
> intend
> for Novamente to deal with *this* kind of content-richness in the fairly
> near future (how near depending on the achievement of relevant funding,
> blah
> blah blah).  I believe that this level of richness doesn't require the
> kind
> of complex, specialized pre-filtering that human-eye-level richness
> requires...
>
Urgh, the adjective applies to what goes on *inside*, not what comes in
from the outside. If you just create 30x30 PixelNodes and let the generic
processes do the rest, you don't have content-richness (or if you do, you
have to learn *all* of it). Its a question of what kind of build-in
support you have for stuff like the things I mentioned (resolving
ambiguity, object completion, invariance under transformations, temporal
patterns).. And yeah, I know novamente can recognize temoral patterns
;->...

Moshe



> -- Ben
>
>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > In a private email, Moshe Looks added a common complaint that I'd
>> > forgotten:
>> >
>> > ----
>> >
>> > Complaint: Learning to be intelligent isn�t possible without building
>> up
>> > abstract cognitions hierarchically from a foundation of content-rich
>> > sensory
>> > and action streams.   While Novamente can deal with content-rich
>> sensory
>> > and
>> > action streams in principle, it�s not really centrally designed
>> for this.
>> > Work on AGI should begin with study of perception and action,
>> and then one
>> > should ask what sort of cognition naturally goes along with
>> one�s working
>> > perception and action modules � and the answer may or may not look
>> like
>> > Novamente.
>> >
>> Well, this is a bit of a straw-man. I guess its fairly close to the view
>> of Patrick Winston and Project Genesis (http://genesis.csail.mit.edu/),
>> but *I* was applying the words "content-rich" to modalities rather that
>> sensory and action streams. For example, would you condsider a 30x30
>> binary pixel grid with a logo turtle "content-rich sensory and action
>> streams"? Maybe, but I'm sure its not the first image that appears in
>> the
>> minds of the intrepid AGIers reading this ;-). Yet you can come up with
>> all sorts of "rich" modality-specific  problems, like resolving
>> ambiguity,
>> object completion, invariance under transformations, temporal patterns,
>> etc, etc, etc... Clearly a buch of the brain's perception/action
>> complexity is completely irrelevant in dealing with such a world, but
>> not
>> all of it! The Anwser still bascially works, I just wanted to get the
>> question clear..
>>
>> Moshe
>>
>> ****************************
>>
>> > Answer: Our intuition is that content-rich media aren�t critical,
>> rather
>> > that what�s important for learning to think is interaction with other
>> > minds
>> > in a shared perceptual environment in which you�re embodied.
>> However, if
>> > content-rich media are critical, Novamente can be used for rich
>> > sensorimotor
>> > processing perfectly well.  While it�s always possible to code
>> specialized
>> > processing code for each type of sensor and actuator, we believe it�s
>> > better
>> > to begin with a common framework (such as BOA+PTL) and then
>> specialize it
>> > to
>> > deal with the different modalities.  This is conceptually
>> analogous to the
>> > way the brain uses the same basic neural mechanisms to deal with the
>> > different human modalities, and also with cognition.
>> >
>> > ----
>> >
>> >> Complaint: The design is too complicated, there are too many
>> >> parts to coordinate, too many things that could go wrong
>> >>
>> >> Answer: Yes it IS complicated, and we wish it were simpler, but
>> >> we haven�t found a simpler design that doesn�t seem patently
>> >> unworkable.  Note that the human brain is also mighty complicated
>> >> � this may just be the nature of making general intelligence work
>> >> with limited resources.
>> >>
>> >> Complaint: BOA and PTL are not enough, you need some kind of more
>> >> fundamentally innovative, efficient, or (whatever) learning
>> >> algorithm.  This complaint never comes along with any suggestion
>> >> regarding what this �mystery algorithm� might be, though � most
>> >> often it is hypothesized that detailed understanding of the human
>> >> brain will reveal it.
>> >>
>> >> Answer: This is possible, but it seems to us that a hybrid of BOA
>> >> and PTL will be enough.  The question is whether deeper
>> >> integration of BOA and PTL than we�ve done now will allow BOA
>> >> learning of reasonably large (500-1000 node) combinator trees.
>> >> If so, then we almost surely don�t need any other learning
>> >> algorithm, though other algorithms may be helpful.
>> >>
>> >> Complaint: You�re programming in too much stuff: you should be
>> >> making more of a pure self-organizing learning system without so
>> >> many in-built rules and heuristics
>> >>
>> >> Answer: Well, the human brain seems to have a lot of stuff
>> >> programmed in, as well as a robust capability for self-organizing
>> >> learning.  Conceptually, we love the idea of a pure
>> >> self-organizing learning system as much as anyone, but it doesn�t
>> >> seem to be feasible given realistic time and processing power and
>> >> memory constraints.
>> >>
>> >> Complaint: Programming explicit logical rules is just wrong;
>> >> logic should occur as an emergent phenomenon from more
>> >> fundamental subsymbolic dynamics
>> >>
>> >> Answer: Probabilistic logic is not necessarily symbolic; in the
>> >> Novamente design we use PTL for both subsymbolic and symbolic
>> >> learning, which we believe is a highly elegant approach.  The
>> >> differences between subsymbolic probabilistic logic and e.g.
>> >> Hebbian learning are not really very great when you look at them
>> >> mathematically rather than in terms of verbiage.  The Novamente
>> >> design is not tied to programming-in logical knowledge a la Cyc.
>> >> It�s true that the PTL rules are programmed in (though in
>> >> Novamente 2.0 they will be made adaptable), but this isn�t so
>> >> different from the brain having particular kinds of long-term
>> >> potentiation wired in, is it?
>> >
>> >
>> > -------
>> > 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]
>>
>>
>
>
> -------
> 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