Russell Wallace wrote:
On 3/13/07, *Richard Loosemore* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Good god no. It *is* the program. It is the architecture of an AI.
So it is part of the AI then, like I said.
Regarding the use of readable names. The atomic units of knowledge in
the resulting system (the symbols, concepts, logical terms, whatever you
want to call them) are mostly built by the system itself, so they start
out without names that are chosen by me, obviously.
So what do you build then? You seemed to be saying that you the human
were planning to build something big and complex based on some
scientific knowledge. And then the program would start running and
create more stuff, but I'm talking about what happens before you press
Go. You've got this big complex thing (BCT) that you the human will
write, yes? Doesn't BCT, whatever my misunderstandings about your plans
for its exact nature, need to be written in a human-maintainable
notation with readable variable names and whatnot, then?
8-|
All along I have been talking about the architecture, the knowledge
acquisition mechanisms and (crucially) the semantic opaqueness of the
symbols, in various types of AI. The "opaqueness of the symbols" issue
was about whether the labels and the structure of the atomic units of
knowledge within the system were going to be (a) chosen by the system
architect, or (b) constructed by the system.
What have variable names got to do with architecture?
When I was talking about the symbols not having preselected names, I was
talking about high-level issues....
You thought I was talking about scrambling the letters in the variable
names, in the software?
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/?list_id=303
