On 10/21/07, John G. Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Vladimir, > > > > That may very well be the case and something that I'm unaware of. The > system I have in mind basically has I/O that is algebraic structures. > Everything that it deals with is modeled this way. Any sort of system that > it analyzes it converts to a particular structure that represents the data. > All of its internal mechanisms are mathematically abstracted out – except > for ancillary hard coded "out of band" assistors, AI, statistics, database, > etc. The idea is to have a system that can understand systems and generate > systems specifically. > John,
What do you mean by system? You imply that these objects have a structure, or equivalently are abstract models of original input. So, you take original input in whatever form it's coming in and based on it you create instances of abstract structures according to templates that are known to system. Is it essentially correct? If so, it's very similar to categorization approach: you observe experience indirectly, through categorization structure that current perception system produces for it. If you need to model a boolean based "space" for some sort of sampled data > world it "sees" and correlates to that, the thing would generate a boolean > algebra modeled and represented onto that informational structure for that > particular "space" instance being studied. For example electronics theory – > it would need to model that world as an "instance" based on electronics > descriptor items and operators in that particular world or "space" set. > Electronics theory world could be "spat" out as something very minor that it > understands. > So, it would assembled a description 'in place' from local rules, based on information provided by specific experience. Is it a correct restatement? Not sure if my terminology is very standard but do you understand the > thinking? It may very well be morphic to other AGI structures or theories I > don't know but I kind of like the way it works represented as such because > it seems simple and not messy but very comprehensive and has other good > qualities. > It's very vague, but can with a stretch of imagination be mapped to many other views. It's unclear with this level of detail. -- Vladimir Nesov mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- 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=8660244&id_secret=56066281-5a9cbe
