--- "YKY (Yan King Yin)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/20/07, rooftop8000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, I've been thinking for a bit about how a big collaboration AI project > > could work. I browsed the archives and i see you guys have similar > > ideas.... > > > > I'd love to see someone build a system that is capable of adding any > > kind of AI algorithm/idea to. It should unite the power of all existing > > different flavors: neural nets, logical systems, etc > > > > [...] > > > > But you could always allow people to make their own critics (modules) > > in any way, as long as they are executable. So people can still use there > > preferred way of doing things and contribute. > > > > Singh described a central hierarchy of critics, but it will be probably > > be better to distribute it somehow, so different people can run their > > own hierarchy and communicate results over the web to other > > people (connecting different hierarchies into a big one) > > They can also fine-tune things (spend cpu-time on what they find > > interesting) and maybe locally test out their own critics. > > > > This can scale very well. People can offer their own modules > > for people to run and reflective critics will probably be designed that > favor > > the most useful modules. > > > > Singh uses 1 type of representation for communication between all > > the modules. This isn't really necessary, you can use any data structure > for > > critic to critic communication. But you'll need to make flexible ones for > > the critics you code, or people won't collaborate. > > > > Do you guys think all this makes sense? Are there any previous > collaboration > > attempts like this that i should be aware of? > > Thanks > > Just one big question: are you way *overestimating* the number of people > who could contribute such modules? Is your idea like, people contributing > modules for face-recognition, fruit-recognition, license-plate recognition, > etc, etc, and you join these modules together? What mechanism do you have > to ensure that you would end up with a system that can recognize *all* > things? > > It seems that you're taking the idea of online collaboration too far. > (Please correct me if I've mistaken your position...) > > YKY >
I think splitting things up in small manageable modules will allow this. Not all the work is developing some killer learning algorithm, you also need a lot of modules in between that do simpler tasks For example simple translation modules or modules that handle connections to peers over the web... Modules that manage a knowledge database... I'm sure a lot of people can help. I am not sure this ends up being able to recognize all things. I will be happy to see a system where people can add their ideas ( new and existing) to with minimal effort, but thats a huge step in the good direction, i think I still have no idea how it could work though, ideas are welcome :) ____________________________________________________________________________________ Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367 ----- 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
