On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 7:41 PM, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Understanding" can be as simple as matching terms in two documents, or > something more complex, such as matching a video clip to a text or > audio description. However, there is an incentive to develop > sophisticated solutions (e.g. distinguish TV programming from > commercials). This is the S part of the problem, essentially a > hierarchical adaptive pattern recognition problem that could be > implemented as a neural network or something similar on each peer. For > language, the pattern hierarchy is letters -> words -> semantic > categories -> grammatical structures. The task is divided by pattern. > A peer whose expertise is recognizing when a picture contains an animal > could route the message to peers that recognize cats or dogs. I > believe that extremely narrow domains are practical in a network with > billions of peers. > > The D part is "old school" AI, calculators, databases, theorem provers, > programs that play chess, etc. Interfacing these to natural language > is a job for the S peers, matching the most common expressions to their > formal equivalents. This is not a hard problem in narrow domains.
So my distinction between S-first and D-first isn't particularly relevant to you, because you're not proposing a monolithic AGI; you're instead proposing a community or marketplace of narrow AI modules (some S-oriented, some D-oriented), that will hopefully constitute a sort of loosely bound collective intelligence. Would that be an accurate paraphrase of your view? ------------------------------------------- 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
