On 6/12/07, Derek Zahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Some people, especially those espousing a modular software-engineering type of approach seem to think that a perceptual system basically should spit out a token for "chair" when it sees a chair, and then a reasoning system can take over to reason about chairs and what you might do with them -- and further it is thought that the "reasoning about chairs" part is really the essence of intelligence, whereas chair detection is just discardable pre-processing. My personal intuition says that by the time you have taken experience and boiled it down to a token labeled "chair" you have discarded almost everything important about the experience and all that is left is something that can be used by our logical inference systems.
Assume that the inference systems do well. Therefore, not *that* much information is discarded. Therefore, the inference systems have found a workaround to collect the information about a particular "chair" that is not directly accessible through a single token (e.g by a subtle context of a myriad of other tokens). ----- 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=e9e40a7e
