Mark Waser wrote:
I've got to wonder if the masses of text on the Internet could, in
themselves,
display a sufficient richness of patterns to obviate the need for
grounding
in another domain like a physical or virtual world, or mathematics.
A system is grounded if it's internal representations are internally
consistent and map accurately and completely to the experiences possible
in a (physical or virtual domain).
Expert systems are not grounded because they do not map completely.
There is always some additional factor that they do not "experience" or
account for.
Most typical proto-AGI systems pretend to ground because they use
English words that are grounded for the observer but which are not
grounded for the system because they have a meaning which is enforced
upon the system without being understood by the system.
A system which can only experience text still could be grounded in the
physical world provided that there is enough text to describe the
physical world well enough for the system to be grounded. Couldn't any
of us be said to still be grounded in the physical world even if we were
removed from it except for a text interface?
The real trick is to get a system to state where entirely internally
consistent (in terms of definitions, etc., not predictions) and large
enough to be useful.
I applaud your attempt to bring some sense to this discussion.
It won't work, of course. There is just no way to stop people having
meaningless discussions about "grounding", in which the thing they mean
by the word has only a distant relationship to the real meaning.
Pity, because the real thing is indeed worth discussing.
Richard Loosemore
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=95818715-a78a9b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
