My latest thinking tends to agree with Matt that language and common sense are best learnt together. (Learning langauge "before" common sense is impossible / senseless).
I think Ben's text mining approach has one big flaw: it can only reason about existing knowledge, but cannot generate new ideas using words / concepts. I want to stress that AGI needs to be able to think at the WORD/CONCEPT level. In order to do this, we need some rules that *rewrite* sentences made up of words, such that the AGI can reason from one sentence to another. Such rewrite rules are very numerous and can be very complex -- for example rules for auxillary words and prepositions, etc. I'm not even sure that such rules can be expressed in FOL easily -- let alone learn them! The embodiment approach provides an environment for learning qualitative physics, but it's still different from the common sense domain where knowledge is often verbally expressed. In fact, it's not the environment that matters, it's the knowledge representation (whether it's expressive enough) and the learning algorithm (how sophisticated it is). YKY ------------------------------------------- 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
