It's probably not worth too much taking this a lot further, since we're talking in analogies and metaphors. However, it's my intuition that the connectivity in a probabilistic formulation is going to produce a much denser graph (less sparse matrix) than what you find in the SAT problems that the solvers do so well on. And I seriously doubt that a general SMT solver + prob. theory is going to beat a custom probabilistic logic solver.
On Wednesday 20 February 2008 05:31:59 pm, Ben Goertzel wrote: > Not necessarily, because > > --- one can encode a subset of the rules of probability as a theory in > SMT, and use an SMT solver > > -- one can use probabilities to guide the search within an SAT or SMT solver... > > ben > ------------------------------------------- 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
