YKY: the way our language builds up new ideas seems to be very complex, and it makes natural language a bad knowledge representation for AGI..... An even more complex example: "spread the jam with a knife" "draw a circle with a knife" "cut the cake with a knife" "rape the girl with a knife" "stop the train with a knife" (with unclear meaning) So the simple concept "do X with a knife" can be interpreted in myriad ways -- it generates new ideas in complex ways.
YKY, Good example, but how about: language is open-ended, period and capable of "infinite" rather than myriad interpretations - and that open-endedness is the whole point of it?. Simple example much like yours : "handle". You can attach words for objects ad infinitum to form different sentences - "handle an egg/ spear/ pen/ snake, stream of water etc." - the hand shape referred to will keep changing - basically because your hand is capable of an infinity of shapes and ways of handling an infinity of different objects. . And the next sentence after that first one, may require that the reader know exactly which shape the hand took. But if you avoid natural language, and its open-endedness then you are surely avoiding AGI. It's that capacity for open-ended concepts that is central to a true AGI (like a human or animal). It enables us to keep coming up with new ways to deal with new kinds of problems and situations - new ways to "handle" any problem. (And it also enables us to keep recognizing new kinds of objects that might classify as a "knife" - as well as new ways of handling them - which could be useful, for example, when in danger). ----- Original Message ----- From: YKY (Yan King Yin) To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 7:14 PM Subject: Re: [agi] would anyone want to use a commonsense KB? On 2/28/08, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> 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 > > There is a substantial amount of literature that claims that *humans* can't generate new ideas de novo either -- and that they can only build up "new" ideas from existing pieces. That's fine, but the way our language builds up new ideas seems to be very complex, and it makes natural language a bad knowledge representation for AGI. For example: An "apple pie" is a pie with apple fillings. A "door knob" is a knob attached to a door. A "street prostitute" is prostitute working in the streets. So the meaning of AB depends on the *interactions* of A and B, and it violates the principle of compositionality -- where the meaning of AB would be somehow combined from A and B in a *fixed* way. An even more complex example: "spread the jam with a knife" "draw a circle with a knife" "cut the cake with a knife" "rape the girl with a knife" "stop the train with a knife" (with unclear meaning) So the simple concept "do X with a knife" can be interpreted in myriad ways -- it generates new ideas in complex ways. YKY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.3/1308 - Release Date: 3/3/2008 10:01 AM ------------------------------------------- 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
