Since combinatorial search problems are so common to artificial intelligence, it has obvious applications. If such an algorithm can be made, it seems like it could be used *everywhere* inside an AGI: deduction (solve for cases consistent with constraints), induction (search for the best model), planning... Particularly if there is a generalization to soft constraint problems.
On 6/22/08, Jim Bromer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Abram, > I did not group you with "probability buffs". One of the errors I feel that > writers make when their field is controversial is that they begin > representing their own opinions from the vantage of countering critics. > Unfortunately, I am one of those writers, (or perhaps I am just projecting). > But my comment about the probability buffs wasn't directed toward you, I > was just using it as an exemplar (of something or another). > > Your comments seem to make sense to me although I don't know where you are > heading. You said: > "what should be hoped for is convergence to (nearly) correct models of > (small parts of) the universe. So I suppose that rather than asking for > "meaning" in a fuzzy logic, I should be asking for clear accounts of > convergence properties..." > > When you have to find a way to tie together components of knowledge together > you typically have to achieve another kind of convergence. Even if these > 'components' of knowledge are reliable, they cannot usually be converged > easily due to the complexity that their interrelations with other kinds of > knowledge (other 'components' of knowledge) will cause. > > To follow up on what I previously said, if my logic program works it will > mean that I can combine and test logical formulas of up to a few hundred > distinct variables and find satisfiable values for these combinations in a > relatively short period of time. I think this will be an important method > to test whether AI can be advanced by advancements in handling complexity > even though some people do not feel that logical methods are appropriate to > use on multiple source complexity. As you seem to appreciate, logic can > still be brought to to the field even though it is not a purely logical game > that is to be played. > > When I begin to develop some simple theories about a subject matter, I will > typically create hundreds of minor variations concerning those theories over > a period of time. I cannot hold all those variations of the conjecture in > consciousness at any one moment, but I do feel that they can come to mind in > response to a set of conditions for which that particular set of variations > was created for. So while a simple logical theory (about some subject) may > be expressible with only a few terms, when you examine all of the possible > variations that can be brought into conscious consideration in response to a > particular set of stimuli, I think you may find that the theories could be > more accurately expressed using hundreds of distinct logical values. > > If this conjecture of mine turns out to be true, and if I can actually get > my new logical methods to work, then I believe that this new range of > logical methods may show whether advancements in complexity can make a > difference to AI even if its application does not immediately result in > human level of intelligence. > > Jim Bromer > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2008 4:38:02 PM > Subject: Re: [agi] Approximations of Knowledge > > Well, since you found my blog, you probably are grouping me somewhat > with the "probability buffs". I have stated that I will not be > interested in any other fuzzy logic unless it is accompanied by a > careful account of the meaning of the numbers. > > You have stated that it is unrealistic to expect a logical model to > reflect the world perfectly. The intuition behind this seems clear. > Instead, what should be hoped for is convergence to (nearly) correct > models of (small parts of) the universe. So I suppose that rather than > asking for "meaning" in a fuzzy logic, I should be asking for clear > accounts of convergence properties... but my intuition says that from > clear meaning, everything else follows. > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > 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/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- 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=106510220-47b225 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
