I was thinking of adding two new branches to plant and animal taxonomies for say software and machines/electronics. AGI's would be in their own tree-branch but all software would be categorized. Extinct software could be on there and then existing software for example virus scanners would be in the same general tree as disk defragmenters though they are different, they have similar origins/characteristics. Device drivers would be like proteins or catalysts, plants and animals have DNA and software has source code as DNA. Probably would need a biologist's help on this one.
Softwares would have Latin names like say NARS would be Narsissicus Logiciodes and Novamente would be Novamentae Hypergraphicus and say Cyc could be Cyclicina Moronicoteus (oops couldn't resist heh). But you get what I mean this is pretty good eh? 100 years from now when Archeologists are searching the software fossil record, looking though garbage dumps and finding old hard drives with partial data images, the software's will be classified systematically. John > From: Pei Wang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > My feeling is that it is better to classify the AGI projects alone > multiple dimensions, rather than a single one. > > 1. Their exact goal (or their working definition of intelligence). On > this aspect, I've tried to put them into 5 groups: > * structure (e.g., to build brain model) > * behavior (e.g., to simulate human mind) > * capability (e.g., to solve hard problems) > * function (e.g., to have cognitive facilities) > * principle (e.g., to establish general theory) > examples are in http://www.cis.temple.edu/~pwang/203-AI/Lecture/AGI.htm > > 2. Their technical strategy. So far I see 3 schools: > * to integrate existing AI techniques (some people in mainstream > AI are moving in this direction) > * to establish an overall architecture, with modules that are > based on different techniques (some mainstream AI people do this under > the name of "cognitive architecture"; integrative AGI projects are > also in this school) > * to develop a unified core technique, then to extend it in > various directions (some AGI projects mainly depend on a single > technology) > > 3. Their major technology. This list is never complete, though the > most common ones are: > *. logic > *. probability theory > *. knowledge base > *. production system > *. natural language processing > (the above are often collectively called "symbolic") > *. neural network > *. evolutionary computation > *. robotics > > Pei > > > On 5/9/07, John G. Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is there a standard taxonomy of AGI that is referred to when talking > about > > different AGIs or near AGIs? Saying that a software is an AGI or not > an AGI > > is not descriptive enough. There are probably very few AGIs but many > close > > AGIs and then many, many AIs. Software programs are like the plant > and > > animal kingdom since they breed and multiply and evolve... > > > > John > > > > ----- ----- 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
