David Hart wrote:
On 8/2/08, *Richard Loosemore* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Thus: in my paper there is a quote from a book in which Conway's
efforts were described, and it is transparently clear from this
quote that the method Conway used was random search:
I believe this statement misinterprets the quote and severely
underestimates the amount of thought and design inherent in Conway's
invention. In my option, the stochastic search methodologies (practiced
mainly by his students) can be considred 'tuning/improvement/tweaking'
and NOT themselves part of the high-level conceptual design. But, this
topic is a subjective interpretation rabbithole that is probably not
worth pursuing further.
Back on the topic of OpenCog Prime, I had typed up some comments on the
'required methodologies' thread that were since covered by Ben's
**interactive learning** comments, but my comments may still be useful
as they come from a slightly different perspective (although they
require familiarity with OCP terminology found in the wikibook, and I'm
sure Ben will chime in to correct or comment if necessary):
'Teaching' [interactive learning] should be included among those words
loaded with much future work to be done.
'Empirical studies done on a massive scale' includes teaching, and does
not necessarily imply using strictly controlled laboratory conditions.
Children learn in their pre-operational and concrete-operational stages
using their own flavor of 'methodological empirical studies' which the
teaching stages of OCP will attempt to loosely recreate with proto-AGI
entities within virtual worlds in a variety of both guided (structured)
and free-form (unstructured) sessions.
The complex systems issue comes into play when considering the
interaction of OCP internal components (expressed in code running in
MindAgents) that modify structures of atoms (including maps, which are
themselves atoms that encapsulate groups of atoms to store patterns of
structure or activity mined from the atomspace) with each other and with
the external world. A key point to consider about MindAgents is that the
result of their operation is a proxy for the action of atoms-on-atoms.
The rules that govern some of these inter-atom interactions are
analogous to the rules within cellular automata systems, and are subject
to the same general types of manipulations and observable behaviors
(e.g. low-level logical rules, various algorithmic manipulations like
GA, MOSES, etc, and higher-level transformations, etc.).
It is intended that correct and efficient learning methodologies will be
influenced by emergent behaviors arising from elements of interaction
(beginning at the inter-atom level) and tuning (mostly at the MindAgent
level), all of which is carefully considered in the OCP design (although
not yet explicitly and thoroughly explained in the wikibook).
The complex systems issue does not come into play in only that location.
Or rather, there is no basis on which you can say that it only occurs
there.
More generally, this does not address the questions that I asked. Was
it meant to?
Richard Loosemore
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=108809214-a0d121
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
