On Friday 11 April 2008 03:17:21 pm, Steve Richfield wrote: > > Steve: If you're saying that your system builds a model of its world of > > discourse as a set of non-linear ODEs (which is what Systems Dynamics is > > bout) then I (and presumably Richard) are much more likely to be > > interested... > > No it doesn't. Instead, my program is designed to work on systems that are > not nearly enough known to model. THAT is the state of the interesting (at > least to me) part of the real world.
If the programmer builds the model of the world beforehand, and the system uses it, it's just standard narrow AI. If the system builds the model itself from unstructured inputs, it's AGI. In some sense, we know how to do that: it's called the scientific method. However, as normally explained, it leaves a lot to intuition. "Form a theory" isn't too far from "and then a miracle occurs." In other words, we need to be a little more explicit in how our system will form a theory. Perhaps a good way to characterize any given AGI is to specify: (a) what form are its hypotheses in (b) how are they generated (c) how are they tested (d) how are they revised Would it be fair to say that Dr. Eliza tries to form a causal net / influence diagram type structure? Josh ------------------------------------------- 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=98558129-0bdb63 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
