>> Much of commonsense knowledge is not explicitly stated in books or other
>> reading materials for adults
Almost all commonsense knowledge *is* explicitly written down somewhere --
just not restated constantly in "reading material" (where it would be
redundant). Dictionaries and encyclopedias (and even self-help books) are
wondrous things . . . . :-)
>> many logical rules would have to be inductively learned while the machine is
>> doing the reading.
Actually -- No, I don't believe so. Grammar, definitions, and inheritance
can all be used to *MASSIVELY* reduce the number of rules (as in, by several
orders of magnitude) that need to be learned (and inductive learning is *not* a
particularly effective form of learning at this scale/in a text environment).
>> It seems much easier to simply ask humans to encode the facts / rules.
Why does it seem easier? No one has gotten it to work in the past. What
do you think you know that they don't?
To me, it seems much easier to have an automated system encode the
facts/rules.
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: YKY (Yan King Yin)
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] AGI interests
On 4/18/07, James Ratcliff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark,
> This is the closest Ive seen so far to my work and what I believe in,
Have you got some more specific information / code / algorithm / papers on
gathering and processing world information and discovery of?
> I have been working with text processing and getting a bot to "read" and
process books/ newspapers as a main method of learning.
Hi James, Mark,
I'd be very interested in collaborating on this kind of project (knowledge
harvesting). My thinking is that it is best done via collecting simple facts /
rules from humans (using natural language eg Basic English), rather than from
books or the web.
Much of commonsense knowledge is not explicitly stated in books or other
reading materials for adults. Also, many logical rules would have to be
inductively learned while the machine is doing the reading. It seems much
easier to simply ask humans to encode the facts / rules.
What are your thoughts about this?
YKY
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/?&;
-----
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/?member_id=231415&user_secret=fabd7936
