--- Russell Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there a consensus at least that AGI paths fall into the two > categories of D-then-S or S-then-D?
I think the more traditional classification is D = symbolic, S = pattern recognition/motor, or D = high level, S = low level. The D-then-S approach has been popular not because it is biologically plausible, but because D by itself lends itself to optimizations that enable it to work on available hardware. Unfortunately these optimizations make it incompatible with S, for example, Cyc's (D) failure to interface with natural language (S). The most successful language models are statistical, a pattern recognition problem. It is tempting, I know. The human brain uses 10^15 synapses to store 10^9 bits of symbolic knowledge. If we knew why, it might put D-then-S to rest. -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------- 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
