Ben Goertzel wrote:
Eric wrote:
evolution invested massive computation in getting the KR right.
Yes,the KR
is built for (3+1)-D and a lot more-- it's not just a list of facts,
or some database where you enter logical statements that
are then processed by modus ponens or some such;
it's procedures that can be invoked by code and guide when they should
be and exploit the structure of the world in deep ways.
Adopting your language for a moment, I would say that the KR as such
then consists of two parts:
1) the "code" language that is used both to combine in-built
procedures, and to create new fundamental procedures when no in-built
ones (and no tractable simple combination thereof) adequately applies
2) the set of in-built procedures that is combined within this "code"
language
IMO both 1 and 2 are important.
I believe that to be adequate, the code language must incorporate
something loosely analogous to probabilistic logic (however
implemented) and something analogous to higher-order functions
(however implemented). I.e. it must be sensibly viewable as a
probabilistic logic based functional programming language -- even if
at first glance it doesn't look anything like that.
Why must it be ... ?
Richard Loosemore
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
