On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Charles D Hixson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ed Porter wrote: > > > WHAT ARE THE MISSING CONCEPTUAL PIECES IN AGI? > > > >
There are no apparent missing conceptual pieces in the Novamente approach... Hopefully this will become clear even from the OpenCog documentation that I'll release this summer (which won't cover all of the stuff in Novamente, but a significant subset) However, there are certainly places where only a high-level conceptual design has been sketched out (with an intuitive plausibility argument, often referring to our own or others' prototype experiments) ... and details remain to be filled in, on the mathematical as well as code level. Any one of these places could, after more implementation and experimentation, get revealed to be **concealing** a conceptual problem that isn't now apparent. We'll discover that as we go. But I'll defer enlarging on this in detail till I've released the OpenCog conceptual documentation. After a lot of thought, I've finally figured out the right way to structure the documentation, and the explanation for why I believe it can lead to human-level AGI within a relatively modest amount of effort. So I'm eager to start transmogrifying various internal NM docs into an OpenCog wikibook. But alas, I've got some irritating sys-admin and administrivia tasks, plus some biz meetings, to deal with over the next few days, so this won't proceed nearly as rapidly as I'd like... -- Ben G ------------------------------------------- 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=101455710-f059c4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
