----- Original Message -----
From: Benjamin Goertzel
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 8:02 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] Determinism
I have never been impressed by complicated formulas and I have been many
slick (Math) talking people who couldn't produce anything that worked in the
real world.
A fascinating Freudian slip! ;-)
You caught me for not checking my wording better. It should have read "I have
seen" not "I have been".
I'm not saying that some Math isn't useful for AGI in limited instances,
but I have yet to see any great program that relied very heavily on Math. Most
of the examples I have seen of explaining simple concepts using Math on this
list has resulted in less accurate communication rather than better.
Well, if Novamente succeeds, it will be a disproof of your above statement.
The basic NM design is not motivated by mathematics, but plenty of math has
been used in deriving the details of various aspects of the system. Mostly
math at the advanced undergraduate level though -- no algebraic topology,
several complex variables, etc.
We use some probability theory ... and some of the theory of rewriting
systems, lambda calculus, etc. This stuff is in a subordinate role to a
cognitive-systems-theory-based design, but is still very useful...
You might be correct for your project but I doubt that the Math contained in
your project is more than a small fraction of the code. All algorithms aren't
Math and most code has to do with Computer Science techniques not Math.
Some people view all computer code as a kind of Math but I don't see giving
Math such a broad definition very useful.
I didn't say Math was useless for AGI, just not a relevant as other Computer
Science techniques.
David Clark
-----
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
